# Direct X 11.1 is Windows 8 exclusive, no plans to retrofit



## Feels Good Man (Nov 12, 2012)

> _Windows 8 is to receive Direct X 11.1 exclusively, with no plans to make it available for older versions of Microsoft’s OS. In response to the company’s position, a Microsoft employee has discussed the move on its official forum._
> 
> _Neowin reports that Microsoft employee Daniel Moth took to the Microsoft Answers forum to discuss the move, where he said, “DirectX 11.1 is part of Windows 8, just like DirectX 11 was part of Windows 7. DirectX 11 was made available for Vista …. but at this point there is no plan for DirectX 11.1 to be made available on Windows 7.”_


 


> _The update will allow stereoscopic 3D to be viewed with compatible glasses, among other features. here’s a full update list:_
> 
> _Shader tracing and compiler enhancements_
> _Direct3D device sharing_
> ...


 

http://www.vg247.com/2012/11/12/direct-x-11-1-is-windows-8-exclusive-no-plans-to-retrofit/

This is like Windows Vista and DX10 all over again. Bahahaha


----------



## porkiewpyne (Nov 12, 2012)

Meh, I'll live...... I think


----------



## chris888222 (Nov 12, 2012)

DX 11 for the sake of changing my currently good OS to a live tile gimmicky layout?
No thanks, I'll pass. This is not Vista -> 7.


----------



## zygie (Nov 12, 2012)

I'll definitely live. I recently just started PC gaming again and the lot of games I've been playing only ever show using DX9. And, I don't notice the small GR8 GFX OMG stuff anyway.


----------



## Arras (Nov 12, 2012)

A. I'm using Windows 8 in the first place
B. I don't have a proper graphics card
So yeah, not really relevant for me. It's good that MS is really trying to push their new OS though (especially the people still on XP should really upgrade).


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

...and? What's wrong in that?

Microsoft made it clear that they are going to phase out old-style Windows in favour of the new style - Windows 8 is *better* at a variety of tasks and if you're so sacred of Metro, you can always use a third-party start menu. I fail to understand the animosity towards a system that's simply better than 7.

Knowing life, the system files will be "ported" anyways - Windows 7 and 8 are for the most part compatible with each other and it should not pose a problem for hobbysts.


----------



## Gh0sti (Nov 12, 2012)

why do people hate windows 8 I and my CS friends have upgraded and they all like it so why do people hate it.

Accept change and move on windows 8 the really big difference between that and 7 is that the Start menu has a GUI thats the only difference I have seen so stop complaining it works and it works well and faster than 7


----------



## FAST6191 (Nov 12, 2012)

Interesting. Although I was never a fan of the move I could kind of see them not bothering with DX10 on XP. I shall have to ponder what DX11.1 actually means (DX10 was something of a leap until it more or less stalled with Vista and the consoles still being DX9 vintage and DX11 was but a minor tweak on that) before I decide whether I should be annoyed. WINE and similar such projects seem to be doing a bit as well (too early to call whether ReactOS will remain an amusement forever although that I am considering it probably says something).

That said Windows 8 legit licenses are not that bad (and I dare say the 128 gig RAM limit of the entry edition vs the 512 of the big boy editions probably won't trouble anything)- were I looking at a price like that of a standalone 7 license it might come down a "on principle thing".


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Nov 12, 2012)

TBH I kinda like Windows 8's layout, I think people need to realize that desktops can't look like Windows 95 reskins for their entire lifespan.

I'm really thinking about upgrading to Windows 8 if it has compatibility with stuff that matters. While I'm not a big gamer on my laptop this is just a small bonus incentive.


----------



## Rydian (Nov 12, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> I fail to understand the animosity towards a system that's simply better than 7.


Humans hate change, and the windows 8 desktop/UI is a _radical_ change from the desktop that a lot of us have used almost every day _for over 15 years_.

It's like if somebody came out with a car that has the steering wheel in your seat and you steer with your butt.  It doesn't matter how much safer it is, how much more ergonomic, or how much easier it is for a new user... _it's detrimental to people used to the standard workflow_, and for that reason they're very hesitant to change.


----------



## Pong20302000 (Nov 12, 2012)

Feels Good Man said:


>


 
what film is this from


----------



## Bladexdsl (Nov 12, 2012)

They can shove it up their ass; I'm not getting windows 8 as dx 11 is working fine for me don't need 11.1. Win7 and dx 11 work just fine and will still be supported for ages anyway so no loss to me.


----------



## Hadrian (Nov 12, 2012)

Rydian said:


> Humans hate change, and the windows 8 desktop/UI is a _radical_ change from the desktop that a lot of us have used almost every day _for over 15 years_.


I thought it was more to do with a lot of very notable developers and studios coming out against the platform stating how closed it is. I'll just repost these quotes from Croteam:



> What you don’t see here is that, under the hood, the new tiled UI is a means for Microsoft to lock Windows applications into a walled garden, much like the one on iOS.
> 
> One cannot release a tiled UI application by any other means, but only through Windows Store. I cannot even begin to stress out just how horrible this idea is! There is no side-loading, except for corporate use inside one company, and that works only on the enterprise edition of Windows 8. Do we all understand what that means? You cannot download an application from the Internet and run it on your computer. You have to get it from Microsoft's store. Even if it is a free app!
> 
> Each app that you will get through the Windows Store will have to adhere to certain requirements imposed by MS. So far, we know that they've banned mature games, like Skyrim, CoD, and Serious Sam. They have forbidden modding. They could very well forbid Open Source if they want.


 
I don't know much about Windows 8 to know if it's just developers overreacting but a lot of the negative comments I've read have mentioned all of this and very few are pissed because it means eventually you'll have to buy W8 to run the latest software. Those who hate the tiled design just say "meh, I'll switch to desktop mode".


----------



## Arras (Nov 12, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> TBH I kinda like Windows 8's layout, I think people need to realize that desktops can't look like Windows 95 reskins for their entire lifespan.
> 
> I'm really thinking about upgrading to Windows 8 if it has compatibility with stuff that matters. While I'm not a big gamer on my laptop this is just a small bonus incentive.


I've been using Win8 for a month or something and the only thing it was not compatible with were my Bluetooth drivers (which I never use anyway). And yeah most people are just going "IT LOOKS DIFFERENT SO I HATE IT GET OFF MAH LAWN".



Hadrian said:


> I thought it was more to do with a lot of very notable developers and studios coming out against the platform stating how closed it is. I'll just repost these quotes from Croteam:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know much about Windows 8 to know if it's just developers overreacting but a lot of the negative comments I've read have mentioned all of this and very few are pissed because it means eventually you'll have to buy W8 to run the latest software. Those who hate the tiled design just say "meh, I'll switch to desktop mode".


 
You can still do everything you could in Desktop mode, but it is true that the MS Store is limited. Then again, as long as the desktop mode is still there and working, it's not like it's mandatory for devs to port their stuff to the MS store.


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

Rydian said:


> (...) windows 8 desktop/UI is a _radical_ change from the desktop that a lot of us have used almost every day _for over 15 years_. (...) _it's detrimental to people used to the standard workflow_, and for that reason they're very hesitant to change.


Oh, I can see that, but at the same time, we traded the command line for GUI's back in the day and I don't see people running around and nagging how the command line is far superior due to its capacity to inject parameters when running executables.

It takes some time to get used to the new GUI - of course it does. I personally don't understand why Metro isn't just an optional overlay to ease the users into using it, but I'm not going to condemn an entire system because of it, especially if I can download a plugin that'll put the Start Menu right where it belongs.

The fun part is that most people don't really use Start Menu shortcuts - it's infinitely easier to put your shortcuts on the desktop and use that instead. Using the Start Menu, it takes several clicks and a lot of navigation to find what you're looking for, unless you're using the search bar. With Metro, all your executables are in one place, you can customize tiles and icons to your liking and you can *still* search, so at the end of the day, this really does run down to hating.

The MetroUI is *confusing at first*, I'll give you that. I personally prefere using the standard desktop, which is why I have a desktop tile set up. Heck, I even like the Start Menu, but I can make-due without, really.


----------



## Gahars (Nov 12, 2012)

Well, if you want to try and get the gamers on board, this is one way to do it. 

I do think a lot of this Windows hate (or Windows H8 if you like) is misguided. While I could understand being upset about the more closed nature of the OS, most complaints I've seen center around the Metro design... which is something you can easily change anyway.


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

Some food for thought...



Spoiler










 
And yes, I know you can put icons on the taskbar. You can put icons on the Metro UI as well, so that's not an advantage.


----------



## Ikki (Nov 12, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Some food for thought...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
You basically said your post doesn't matter with that closing statement.


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

Ikki said:


> You basically said your post doesn't matter with that closing statement.


Not really - the taskbar is not the size of the entire screen, nor can you divide it into changable tabs.

If anything, I said (well, implied) that Metro does the same job the Start Menu did and more.


----------



## Ikki (Nov 12, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Not really - the taskbar is not the size of the entire screen, nor can you divide it into changable tabs.
> 
> If anything, I said (well, implied) that Metro does the same job the Start Menu did and more.


People use the Start menu?


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

Ikki said:


> People use the Start menu?


Apparently they do, as its lack is the most popular complaint users have againts Windows 8.


----------



## porkiewpyne (Nov 12, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Apparently they do, as its lack is the most popular complaint users have againts Windows 8.


Thought it was the button which brings you to the menu which pissed many people off? Meh I could be wrong.

Tbh I actually do use the Start Menu sometimes to find stuff which I don't create a shortcut for as I don't use it often enough and if I forget the name. I think of it as a mini-widget for My Computer.

And I guess another gripe is that the Start Screen takes up the whole page as opposed to a quarter. But I don't really mind it all that much. Regarding the "more clicks in Start Menu", it's kinda debatable as your most popular programs will be at the top of your list anyway and you can easily pin it there otherwise.


----------



## Qtis (Nov 12, 2012)

People do enjoy complaining about a missing start menu, but the missing features of say, iOS, is just fine. I don't see why upgrading to the new Windows 8 is a problem for most since the upgrade was basically free (15€?). 

ps. What start menu? OS X doesn't have a start menu and I've actually never missed it. The new metro UI is a lot smarter imho for opening programs and such. It's still possible to open the desktop interface on Win8 so it's pretty moot.

pps. Running Windows 7 via Bootcamp and WinXP via Parallels :3


----------



## FAST6191 (Nov 12, 2012)

Bladexdsl said:


> They can shove it up their ass; I'm not getting windows 8 as dx 11 is working fine for me don't need 11.1. Win7 and dx 11 work just fine and will still be supported for ages anyway so no loss to me.



Technically certain versions of windows XP are supported until April and they lack DX10 let alone anything newer.

I did some reading over the afternoon and 11.1 does seem to be enough of a step up from 10(.1) that someone might pay attention as well. I suppose much like DX10 it will depend upon takeup of the relevant versions of windows and whatever chips the PS360 successors end up rebadging (assuming we hear about things this E3 I would be half surprised to see 11.1 grade chips over 11). I would agree it would probably be the foolish dev that limits their game (either completely or might as well have) to DX11.1 at any time in the near future though.

Re the internet button and clicks- quick launch, desktop shortcuts (hover and click has been around for years) and keyboard shortcuts all exist so I am not sure that is the greatest example.


----------



## the_randomizer (Nov 12, 2012)

Unless someone can convince me or explain to me how Windows 8 is better than 7, I refuse to get it.


----------



## Valwin (Nov 12, 2012)

Windows 8 is not better  that W7


----------



## RodrigoDavy (Nov 12, 2012)

I wouldn't see Directx 11.1 being Windows 8 exclusive as a problem. I see Directx itself being Windows exclusive as a problem. Developers should choose to work with OpenGL instead, it is easier to port to other OS, consoles and mobile devices.



the_randomizer said:


> Unless someone can convince me or explain to me how Windows 8 is better than 7, I refuse to get it.


 
I heard it consumes less resources than Windows 7, has a little better battery life, etc, etc...


----------



## chris888222 (Nov 12, 2012)

I don't HATE windows 8, I just find that it doesn't suit every computer, including my old one.
It's going to be damn awkward trying to drag around those tiles.

The only time when I'll upgrade to win8 is when I need a laptop replacement (which will probably take about 4 - 6 months more as mine is starting to screw up). Otherwise, I don't see any particular reason why I should upgrade.

But I'll say: MS's move to integrate computer and tablet UIs are surely a drastic move. Some people will definitely need time to get used to it.


----------



## Arras (Nov 12, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> Unless someone can convince me or explain to me how Windows 8 is better than 7, I refuse to get it.


It has DirectX 11.1.
It boots much faster.
It can sync accounts between PCs.
Better support for multiple monitors.
Better file transfer box that can pause and resume.
Better Task Manager.
Has a Refresh function which is basically a reinstall without having to actually reinstall the OS itself.
Features some sort of built in RAID-like mechanism for external storage.
Improved checkdisk.
It has File History which allows you to keep backups of files in certain folders and restore them to older versions.
Takes less system resources.
Improved hardware acceleration for graphics.
Better printer discovery.
You can put it on and run it from a USB stick.
Centralized search.
The new Mail app is pretty nice.


----------



## Jamstruth (Nov 12, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> I fail to understand the animosity towards a system that's simply better than 7.


You'll excuse me if I prefer being able to run 2 completely resizable program windows side by side (as I am actually doing right now) rather than being forced to use 1 application at a time with the option of having one of them in a miniature, feature reduced form.
I see Metro as a step back in terms of workflow and convenience. Its great for tablets, don't get me wrong, and including it on the PC version to add cross compatibility is brilliant but for full scale computing its just not as convenient. I wouldn't say that Windows 8's system is "better" more...different. The rest of the OS is great, features added, kernel streamlining etc. but I'm never that sure when I use Metro.

As for using the start menu? I use the start menu all the time to search for programs or documents I don't want pinned to my desktop or taskbar. I'm going to install Start8 when I get my Windows 8 disc downloaded (shitty internet... 2 nights and halfway there) just for the convenience of not going into a fullscreen menu to load up another desktop app.



Arras said:


> It has DirectX 11.1.
> Has a Refresh function which is basically a reinstall without having to actually reinstall the OS itself.
> It has File History which allows you to keep backups of files in certain folders and restore them to older versions.
> Centralized search.


(I removed ones I had no issues with)
1. That Refresh button is going to be HELL! Imagine how many people are going to phone Tech Support because they pressed that button. Imagine.
2. Windows 7 has a backup feature, not sure whether it has selective restores though.
3. Umm... yeah Vista and Win7's start menu says hi. I can search my computer just as easily here as on Windows 8.


----------



## the_randomizer (Nov 12, 2012)

Arras said:


> It has DirectX 11.1.
> It boots much faster.
> It can sync accounts between PCs.
> Better support for multiple monitors.
> ...


 
I stand corrected


----------



## Janthran (Nov 12, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> ...and? What's wrong in that?
> 
> Microsoft made it clear that they are going to phase out old-style Windows in favour of the new style - Windows 8 is *better* at a variety of tasks and if you're so sacred of Metro, you can always use a third-party start menu. I fail to understand the animosity towards a system that's simply better than 7.
> 
> Knowing life, the system files will be "ported" anyways - Windows 7 and 8 are for the most part compatible with each other and it should not pose a problem for hobbysts.


I don't like Windows 8 because there's no support for my graphics card.
That's the only reason.


----------



## RodrigoDavy (Nov 12, 2012)

The main problem seems to be the fact the "Metro" UI is especially designed for tablets and M$ didn't have the trouble to release a more desktop/mouse friendly interface. Well, people who doesn't like it can simply use the older versions of Windows or consider using other Operating Systems. I don't think there are going to be directx 11.1 exclusive games anyway.


----------



## Janthran (Nov 12, 2012)

Hadrian said:


> I thought it was more to do with a lot of very notable developers and studios coming out against the platform stating how closed it is. I'll just repost these quotes from Croteam:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know much about Windows 8 to know if it's just developers overreacting but a lot of the negative comments I've read have mentioned all of this and very few are pissed because it means eventually you'll have to buy W8 to run the latest software. Those who hate the tiled design just say "meh, I'll switch to desktop mode".


 
That's just an overreaction. I used to have Windows 8 and I could run programs that weren't on the shop. Heck, the shop wasn't even open at the time.


----------



## Valwin (Nov 12, 2012)

W8 was made with tablets in mind so you see why is not so good in normal PC


----------



## Arras (Nov 12, 2012)

Valwin said:


> W8 was made with tablets in mind so you see why is not so good in normal PC


actually I have a normal pc and W8 works fine
Most people are just overreacting. It may take a bit of getting used to, but it doesn't deserve all the hate it's getting. Most things are still in the place where you'd expect them to be, the only thing that really changed is the Start Menu and learning how the parts of it you use changed can be done in a few hours of playing with it. I have a few friends who tried it and they didn't really have any problem with it either. Most people are judging it before they give it a proper chance and use it for a few weeks.


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> Unless someone can convince me or explain to me how Windows 8 is better than 7, I refuse to get it.



Faster boot and power off times.
Decreased usage of RAM by the system.
Hyper-V built-in to improve virtualization.
Significantly-improved read/write speeds, at least according to a Crystal Disk Mark benchmark I saw.
Decreased encoding/decoding time when working with video files.
Increased framerates in some games, decreased in others. Pretty hit-and-miss from what I've seen so-far and the differences are minute, but hey! We don't have any patches or games written specifically for Windows 8 yet.
Automatic detection of SSD drives, preventing their defragmentation and using TRIM instead.
Automated detection of all of your installed applications and grouping them on the Apps screen, regardless of whether or not they are registered in the system - everything's always at arm's reach.
Integrated contacts management built into the system.
Easy access to your favourite services over "Live Tiles" updated in real-time.
Integrated SkyDrive cloud storage service.
No more reinstalling - there's a built in "Refresh System" option which will automatically return it to "Factory Settings", making the installation "Mint" and clean of all junk that might've accumulated in it.
Enhanced task manager in comparison to the one we know from Windows 7.
Built-in ISO mounting function.
Windows Store built-in.
Improved overall security due to SmartScreen, Defender and Safe Boot (UEFI) integration and TPM (if the computer has a module) or at least so the story goes...
The system "appears to work smoother".
That's about it, but to really know what Windows 8 means to you, you should install it, tinker with it and check for yourself. It (literally) doesn't cost you anything since Microsoft hosts the ISO, so go ahead and give it a little test drive.



Jamstruth said:


> You'll excuse me if I prefer being able to run 2 completely resizable program windows side by side (as I am actually doing right now) rather than being forced to use 1 application at a time with the option of having one of them in a miniature, feature reduced form.





Spoiler











Err... Two resizable windows in Windows 8. Problem?


> I see Metro as a step back in terms of workflow and convenience. Its great for tablets, don't get me wrong, and including it on the PC version to add cross compatibility is brilliant but for full scale computing its just not as convenient. I wouldn't say that Windows 8's system is "better" more...different. The rest of the OS is great, features added, kernel streamlining etc. but I'm never that sure when I use Metro.


The workflow issues are not due to the system differences themselves - you still have a massive desktop full of icons and a search bar - you literally have the same features, you just "click less" than if you were to use the Start Menu.



> As for using the start menu? I use the start menu all the time to search for programs or documents I don't want pinned to my desktop or taskbar.





Spoiler










A SEARCHBAR! THAR SHE BLOWS!


----------



## Deleted User (Nov 12, 2012)

oh I'm not falling for it this time, would never have left windows xp if microsoft didn't have to go out of its way to be a jerk.
Am I the only one who hates what Steve Ballmer is doing to microsoft?


----------



## FAST6191 (Nov 12, 2012)

I dare say your little list could do with a bit of pruning Foxi4- several of those are not exactly true selling points as much as minor tweaks and things I might raise an eyebrow for.
8. W7 does have TRIM support, it is a bit odd in some implementations but straight sata SSD (which is no small percentage of them) should be good.
10. Really? I could be cute and say the old cardfile, most older versions shipped with something resembling outlook express.
12. By all means add it but when MS tries muscling in on a type of service. Granted they are somewhat better than the embrace, extent and extinguish model of yesteryear. Most of the similar providers have explorer extensions and FTP has long been possible too.
15. http://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/620/..._mount_images_iso_files_without_burning_them/ Granted it does technically make it an addon/hidden option but I doubt an argument to truly dismiss it could be made.
16. I am unsure whether to refer to 12, some of the old windows catalog stuff or similar such things.

3 and 7 might have a bit of dissonance as well.

The rest are pretty interesting improvements, whether they are worth it so much is something we probably have to debate (does 1 really matter when standby/hibernate exists?).

Edit- @KooPako XP was technically released back in 2001. I like XP as much or more than most but that is a pretty good run and I can not think of any of the LTS builds of linux distros that quite match that right now.


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

FAST6191 said:


> I dare say your little list could do with a bit of pruning Foxi4- several of those are not exactly true selling points as much as minor tweaks and things I might raise an eyebrow for.
> 8. W7 does have TRIM support, it is a bit odd in some implementations but straight sata SSD (which is no small percentage of them) should be good.
> 10. Really? I could be cute and say the old cardfile, most older versions shipped with something resembling outlook express.
> 12. By all means add it but when MS tries muscling in on a type of service. Granted they are somewhat better than the embrace, extent and extinguish model of yesteryear. Most of the similar providers have explorer extensions and FTP has long been possible too.
> ...


I was really just listing the changes that I could personally find on short notice - I'm pretty sure there's a myriad of other improvements.  I'm not using some of those features myself, however "they're there", so why not list them? 

*EDIT: *Yeah, 3 and 7 did look similar... I just forgot I already listed that, I "wiped" 3 off the list.


----------



## Arras (Nov 12, 2012)

Jamstruth said:


> (I removed ones I had no issues with)
> 1. That Refresh button is going to be HELL! Imagine how many people are going to phone Tech Support because they pressed that button. Imagine.
> 2. Windows 7 has a backup feature, not sure whether it has selective restores though.
> 3. Umm... yeah Vista and Win7's start menu says hi. I can search my computer just as easily here as on Windows 8.


1. It's located in PC Settings (somewhere most techno-idiots wouldn't look, this is only a problem for the guys who think they are smart but actually have no clue what they're doing) under General and lists what it does quite clearly.
2. It's different. Win7 just backed up your whole drive. This basically copies the files every time you change them and allows you to pick what files to restore to what date.
3. The Win8 search allows you to search for apps, files, settings and anything that can be found using one of the apps (like, search inside the Store, Wikipedia, Mail etc).


----------



## Minox (Nov 12, 2012)

Exclusive or not, a fair share of games are still being made with DX9 in focus. Due to that I find it somewhat unlikely that this is something you'll notice immediately but rather one or two generations away when DX11.0 has become the new DX9.

And even so, there is still openGL which should not suffer from such artificial limitations.


----------



## Qtis (Nov 12, 2012)

KooPako said:


> oh I'm not falling for it this time, would never have left windows xp if microsoft didn't have to go out of its way to be a jerk.
> Am I the only one who hates what Steve Ballmer is doing to microsoft?


Windows 7 changed quite a bit to the better. Vista was a disappointment, but comparing Windows XP with Windows 7 shows a clear winner. Windows 7 has more advantages than Windows XP in terms of new features and support for new hardware solutions.

ps. Running Windows XP on a virtual machine is a good option if you really need to use it for something (gaming for me). Otherwise go for Windows 7/8. Especially if your computer is newer.


----------



## Jamstruth (Nov 12, 2012)

Arras said:


> 1. It's located in PC Settings (somewhere most techno-idiots wouldn't look, this is only a problem for the guys who think they are smart but actually have no clue what they're doing) under General and lists what it does quite clearly.
> 2. It's different. Win7 just backed up your whole drive. This basically copies the files every time you change them and allows you to pick what files to restore to what date.
> 3. The Win8 search allows you to search for apps, files, settings and anything that can be found using one of the apps (like, search inside the Store, Wikipedia, Mail etc).


Yeah... never underestimate the end user who thinks he knows what he;s doing my friend.
And I'll give you the in-app search bit (I can search for mail but that's only because they're stored as files) but I can find files, settings, apps, anything from my own search bar.
This is a silly argument though.


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

Minox said:


> Exclusive or not, a fair share of games are still being made with DX9 in focus. Due to that I find it somewhat unlikely that this is something you'll notice immediately but rather one or two generations away when DX11.0 has become the new DX9.
> 
> And even so, there is still openGL which should not suffer from such artificial limitations.


Do note that they're produced that way to support the last generation consoles, which by now became a handbreak of the industry - those consoles are being phased out soon though, and DirectX 10/11 will become the standard as new ones roll in.


----------



## Jamstruth (Nov 12, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I was referring to the Metro apps which Microsoft are pushing as the new wave of apps and wanting to fade old traditional desktop ones. The workflow differences are due to the differences between this and desktop. If I want to have 2 Word Documents open at the same time for reference this is limited by a Metro app. If I want to run a program in a small window in the corner while another take up most of the space I can't do this in Metro.



Foxi4 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yep. That sure is a search bar taking up my entire screen there. This wasn't actually a dig at Windows 8. When I was writing that post the most recent one was somebody asking if anybody used the Start Menu. I sure do


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

Jamstruth said:


> ...but I can find files, settings, apps, anything from my own search bar.


...and you can find settings, files, apps and "anything" from Windows 8's searchbar likewise, as I've shown earlier.


----------



## Jamstruth (Nov 12, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> ...and you can find settings, files, apps and "anything" from Windows 8's searchbar likewise, as I've shown earlier.


My point was that it wasn't a feature new to Windows 8.


----------



## Crimsonclaw111 (Nov 12, 2012)

Will wait for Windows 9 or whatever the next iteration becomes.


----------



## EJames2100 (Nov 12, 2012)

When I loaded it up it confused me for a few minu8tes, found the desktop button, googled 'Windows 8 start button', downloaded ClassicShell, now I have a start button and it auto-skips Metro for me.

So faster loading times, boots/shuts down far far quicker, and just seems overall a bit snappier.
It's a decent upgrade from 7.

So I don't really get where the Win8 hate is coming from.


----------



## Arras (Nov 12, 2012)

Jamstruth said:


> Yeah... never underestimate the end user who thinks he knows what he;s doing my friend.


Trust me, I know. That's why I said it would be a problem for those who think they are smart but actually have no clue what they're doing


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

Jamstruth said:


> I was referring to the Metro apps which Microsoft are pushing as the new wave of apps and wanting to fade old traditional desktop ones. The workflow differences are due to the differences between this and desktop. If I want to have 2 Word Documents open at the same time for reference this is limited by a Metro app. If I want to run a program in a small window in the corner while another take up most of the space I can't do this in Metro.


 
You know you can dock and resize Windows in Metro too, right? In fact, you can even work "one side Metro, one side Desktop" with ease, effectively turning the MetroUI into a sidebar. Moreover, the "Desktop" is not being phased out - the Start Menu is.


----------



## shakirmoledina (Nov 12, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Some food for thought...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
you could put an internet explorer shortcut on the desktop and set the mouse to run in one click and not the default two.

then again, I have that games run slower on 8 and engadget tests prove that. I hope this gives performance improvements over JUST quality.


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

shakirmoledina said:


> you could put an internet explorer shortcut on the desktop and set the mouse to run in one click and not the default two.
> 
> then again, I have that games run slower on 8 and engadget tests prove that. I hope this gives performance improvements over JUST quality.


Of course you can put it on the desktop, but as I said, desktops have no tabs. In other words, you are limited as far as space for icons is concerned. In Metro, you are not - you just slide until you get to the app you're interested in.


----------



## Minox (Nov 12, 2012)

EJames2100 said:


> So I don't really get where the Win8 hate is coming from.


Personally I dislike how they're trying to force touch movements upon people without touch-interface devices. Things that might make sense on a touchscreen does not always work when using a mouse and keyboard - it might actually make things a whole lot more tedious than they have to be.

That and I'm not a big fan of them not allowing side-loading of Metro-style programs unless you activate a dev license through the use of console commands.


----------



## RodrigoDavy (Nov 12, 2012)

Embrace the pain of Ubuntu!   (proud Ubuntu user)


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

Ubuntu is the Linux for the masses - it's actually quite nasty considering other choices and has inheritent design flaws as well as a myriad of issues.


----------



## RchUncleSkeleton (Nov 12, 2012)

If game developers are smart they won't create anything that requires DirectX 11.1 until either Windows 8 has gone by the wayside or until microsoft decides to release it for Windows 7. Personally I'm still running XP and completely happy with it, of course I'm not a PC gamer and the last game I did play on PC was GTA: San Andreas/Half Life 2.


----------



## zygie (Nov 12, 2012)

Well this quickly turned into another argument, but that was inevitable. That being said, I like change, and I'd get Win8 before next year (especially since I'm getting it for $15).

I thought about the whole start menu thing and I realized I only ever use the start menu for clicking shut down.

I've also used every version of Windows and while some did have shortcomings they're not entirely worse than the last one, so it's not a big deal for me. I especially dislike using XP after going through Vista, but that's me. 7 was a natural step up, so I'm looking forward to having 8, bad press or not.


----------



## Minox (Nov 12, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Ubuntu is the Linux for the masses - it's actually quite nasty considering other choices and has inheritent design flaws as well as a myriad of issues.


Indeed. There's a reason why Linux Mint has managed to overtake Ubuntu in terms of popularity.


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

zygie said:


> Well this quickly turned into another argument, but that was inevitable.


Where is the argument? All I see is a heated discussion.


----------



## YayMii (Nov 12, 2012)

Jamstruth said:


> I was referring to the Metro apps which Microsoft are pushing as the new wave of apps and wanting to fade old traditional desktop ones. The workflow differences are due to the differences between this and desktop. If I want to have 2 Word Documents open at the same time for reference this is limited by a Metro app. If I want to run a program in a small window in the corner while another take up most of the space I can't do this in Metro.


They're not phasing out traditional desktop apps. In fact, Office 2013 (the non-RT version) consists of traditional desktop apps (although OneNote comes in both flavors).


----------



## Rockhoundhigh (Nov 12, 2012)

Maybe if 7 was as bad as Vista... even then that's pushing it.


----------



## RchUncleSkeleton (Nov 12, 2012)

Qtis said:


> People do enjoy complaining about a missing start menu, but the missing features of say, iOS, is just fine. I don't see why upgrading to the new Windows 8 is a problem for most since the upgrade was basically free (15€?).
> 
> ps. What start menu? OS X doesn't have a start menu and I've actually never missed it. The new metro UI is a lot smarter imho for opening programs and such. It's still possible to open the desktop interface on Win8 so it's pretty moot.
> 
> pps. Running Windows 7 via Bootcamp and WinXP via Parallels :3


Sorry, did you forget to add the part where IOS is a separate OS from OSX? I guess so...
Windows 8 was created to be the successor to Windows 7, IOS is a separate entity from OSX...it was created specifically for touchscreen devices. I can't remember the last time I saw someone running IOS on their iMac or MacBook.


----------



## zygie (Nov 12, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Where is the argument? All I see is a heated discussion.


Perhaps, but then it's always fun to see "heated discussions." Brings out the passions, y'know. Hot passions.


----------



## Arras (Nov 12, 2012)

RchUncleSkeleton said:


> Sorry, did you forget to add the part where IOS is a separate OS from OSX? I guess so...
> Windows 8 was created to be the successor to Windows 7, IOS is a separate entity from OSX...it was created specifically for touchscreen devices. I can't remember the last time I saw someone running IOS on their iMac or MacBook.


They are actually pretty similar and IIRC Apple is trying to combine them even more like how Win8 is trying to combine tablets and desktops.


----------



## pwsincd (Nov 12, 2012)

opened up kids xmas pressie to check out win8, first thing I noticed, no start bar, I'll cope, just a learning curve or 3rd party app. What I did notice was how I couldn't easily see what apps I had open and minimised.. or did I miss something?


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

pwsincd said:


> opened up kids xmas pressie to check out win8, first thing I noticed, no start bar, I'll cope, just a learning curve or 3rd party app. What I did notice was how I couldn't easily see what apps I had open and minimised.. or did I miss something?


Widows Key + Tab gives you a 3D overview (as in 7), hidden sidebar on the left has live thumbnails of all your windows.


----------



## pwsincd (Nov 12, 2012)

ok, I noticed top left corner showed them one at a time, but didn't see a full sidebar, I'll have another look next chance I can get it out without him present. cheers.


----------



## Maverick Lunar X (Nov 12, 2012)

Honestly, most of the hatred I've seen surrounding Windows 8 has been due to confusion about compatibility, because of the RT version. Most people just assume 8 and RT are the same thing, and that everyone will have to abandon their old applications.


----------



## Qtis (Nov 12, 2012)

RchUncleSkeleton said:


> Sorry, did you forget to add the part where IOS is a separate OS from OSX? I guess so...
> Windows 8 was created to be the successor to Windows 7, IOS is a separate entity from OSX...it was created specifically for touchscreen devices. I can't remember the last time I saw someone running IOS on their iMac or MacBook.


 
What I meant with missing features in iOS are indeed missing features in iOS. With new versions on old phones. Missing features (Siri on pre-iPhone 4 for example). The point was more about the complaining about MS features missing/changed compared to Apple's features missing/changed.

Also have you used the latest OS X versions? 10.7 and 10.8 vs 10.6 and before? OS X is indeed separate from iOS, but OS X is becoming iOS or at least taking features from it little by little and becoming more and more like the mobile products made by Apple (unified user experience for one). Most new features in 10.7 vs 10.6 were iOSish features. I'd presume one day we'll see OS X and iOS merged in one way or another with the 11" MBA and the iPad working as a computer + dock like the Asus Transformer tablets.


ps. iOS is a mobile version from OS X with the same foundation à la Darwin/Unix. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system)

Edit: Not meaning to sound like an ass, just pointed it out. I've used Macs side by side Windows machines from 95 or something :3


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

pwsincd said:


> ok, I noticed top left corner showed them one at a time, but didn't see a full sidebar, I'll have another look next chance I can get it out without him present. cheers.


http://i.imgur.com/e6YtB.png

Lower-left should work fine, as in the picture.


----------



## pwsincd (Nov 12, 2012)

, one small step for man


----------



## Jamstruth (Nov 12, 2012)

pwsincd said:


> ok, I noticed top left corner showed them one at a time, but didn't see a full sidebar, I'll have another look next chance I can get it out without him present. cheers.


Top left and drag down the side or bottom left and drag up. Either brings up the Metro Multitask menu.


----------



## DiscostewSM (Nov 12, 2012)

After months of having Win 8 available to install (via MSAA), I installed it yesterday. Needless to say, when I first began working with it, I was irritated by no Start Menu, as I did a lot of stuff through it. I tried different 3rd-party equivalents, but they either did not have enough functionality, or they looked bad. Plus, they weren't exactly stable. After a couple of hours, I threw my hands up and removed everything that tried to give me a Win 7 feel, and I attempted to learn how to use Windows 8.

Now, it really isn't so bad. I can do many of the things I could do in Win 7, I just have to do them in a slightly different manner. For one thing, I now use the Windows key on my keyboard, because before, I'd always click the Start button to do such interaction. I do miss the Aero-Glass look of the windows, but that is something I'll have to get by without.


----------



## Arras (Nov 12, 2012)

DiscostewSM said:


> After months of having Win 8 available to install (via MSAA), I installed it yesterday. Needless to say, when I first began working with it, I was irritated by no Start Menu, as I did a lot of stuff through it. I tried different 3rd-party equivalents, but they either did not have enough functionality, or they looked bad. Plus, they weren't exactly stable. After a couple of hours, I threw my hands up and removed everything that tried to give me a Win 7 feel, and I attempted to learn how to use Windows 8.
> 
> Now, it really isn't so bad. I can do many of the things I could do in Win 7, I just have to do them in a slightly different manner. For one thing, I now use the Windows key on my keyboard, because before, I'd always click the Start button to do such interaction. I do miss the Aero-Glass look of the windows, but that is something I'll have to get by without.


You can still click the bottom left corner to get to the Start Menu if you really want, you know. You can also right click it for some more advanced options.


----------



## LockeCole_101629 (Nov 12, 2012)

as long I can play my online games (which not even using dx 10.1.2.3/11.1.2.3a.b.c.d.e.f.g

I'll stick to my old xp
sure it can be done within hours, considering there's always a piratebay.

this old marketing gimmick is getting old, they should change their strategy
considering there are millions people still using XP/Vista and didn't bother anything about their OS

once you turn on your computer , your first move is to click your internet browser.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Nov 12, 2012)

Fucking Microsoft. This is Vista all over again.


----------



## Gh0sti (Nov 12, 2012)

another reason to upgrade to windows 8 you can install .isos without another program, just run an .iso file and installs without daemon tools


----------



## RodrigoDavy (Nov 12, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Ubuntu is the Linux for the masses - it's actually quite nasty considering other choices and has inheritent design flaws as well as a myriad of issues.


 
You're probably right. Already accepted the fact that it has it flaws, but after 4 years using it I just can't switch back to Windows. I mean, the amount of trouble you have setting up a Windows computer and dealing with the occasional problems are at least the same you do with linux imo.

EDIT: People just don't notice it because they are used to dealing with windows related problems but not linux's.


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

Arras said:


> You can still click the bottom left corner to get to the Start Menu if you really want, you know. You can also right click it for some more advanced options.


I think he means the old-style Start Menu.





soulx said:


> Fucking Microsoft. This is Vista all over again.


Oh no! Microsoft supports their latest operating system and not one from three years back that's soon going to become a legacy system, just like Windows 95 did when 98 entered the scene!

What will we EVER do! After all, we can only _upgrade_ for a small fee! 

C'mon people, it's not like Apple isn't doing the exact same thing with their revisions of the OSX.


----------



## RodrigoDavy (Nov 12, 2012)

I gotta agree that Windows 8 is not that bad, putting the polemic "Metro" UI aside since you can always set it to use the old style desktop. It even got the Live Store (Linux distros have been using something similar for ages and Apple already had it for some time). I mean in other Windows version you would have to update your softwares manually, with the Live store you can update all your software on a regular basis automatically. It's faster, it uses less resources and is much like the W7. What it's not to like? ^^


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

What I'm looking at the most are system resources and how the OS uses them. So-far, Windows has been known to be wasteful as all hell when it comes to RAM and the CPU, in Windows 8's case, I've seen it run on a *128MB RAM* build in an untouched state with Aero turned on, and it did so smoothly... once it loaded, of course (took the guy who filmed it 2-3 hours). 



That in itself is a sign that guys and gals at Microsoft were not farting into their seats all day long and actually optimized the system - it packs more features while leaving a smaller footprint, making it the perfect system especially for netbooks and other portable computers with a low amount of total memory and calculation power.


----------



## Crimson Ghoul (Nov 12, 2012)

I already have windows 8 bought and paid for. 15 dollars for an upgrade is not too much to ask for


----------



## AshuraZro (Nov 12, 2012)

I still load games up in DX9 most of the time. Who gives a shit?


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

AshuraZro said:


> I still load games up in DX9 most of the time. Who gives a shit?


The 21st century.


----------



## Nah3DS (Nov 12, 2012)

LockeCole_101629 said:


> this old marketing gimmick is getting old, they should change their strategy
> considering there are millions people still using XP/Vista and didn't bother anything about their OS
> 
> once you turn on your computer , your first move is to click your internet browser.


that's why ChromeOS exists


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Nov 12, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> I think he means the old-style Start Menu.Oh no! Microsoft supports their latest operating system and not one from three years back that's soon going to become a legacy system, just like Windows 95 did when 98 entered the scene!
> 
> What will we EVER do! After all, we can only _upgrade_ for a small fee!
> 
> C'mon people, it's not like Apple isn't doing the exact same thing with their revisions of the OSX.


Because I don't like the changes in Windows 8 and would prefer to use Windows 7 for the time being.

Not to mention the fact that Direct X 11.1 won't require anything special to Windows 8 and can be done on Windows 7 (and perhaps even Vista). This is just Microsoft being sleazy and trying to increase market-share for their new OS.


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

soulx said:


> Because I don't like the changes in Windows 8 and would prefer to use Windows 7 for the time being.
> 
> Not to mention the fact that Direct X 11.1 won't require anything special to Windows 8 and can be done on Windows 7 (and perhaps even Vista). This is just Microsoft being sleazy and trying to increase market-share for their new OS.


At the very least they're offering an upgrade for $15 - that's not a huge price to pay for an entirely new operating system.


----------



## AshuraZro (Nov 12, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> The 21st century.


Get out of your own ass. Even with DX9 these games still look plenty better than their console counterparts most of the time.


----------



## chyyran (Nov 12, 2012)

I love Windows 8, it boots much faster, and overall performs better than 7. 

As for the M$ store being a lockdown, how come Google can do tiles with Chrome, or Mozilla with FF?


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

AshuraZro said:


> Get out of your own ass. Even with DX9 these games still look plenty better than their console counterparts most of the time.


Well, of course they look okay - they were programmed with DX9 compatibility in mind, but that compatibility is soon to be cut. They're only developed that way as to facilitate easy porting to last generation consoles which are being phased out now - it's not going to take long before DX11 will become the staple of all big productions - it's already being used and it will be used more and more often until DX9 is fully dropped. My comment was sarcastic but accurate - using DX9 at this point in time is living in the past, really - you're two versions behind the standard.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Nov 12, 2012)

AshuraZro said:


> Get out of your own ass. Even with DX9 these games still look plenty better than their console counterparts most of the time.


Support for DX9 won't stay forever. Looking at Steam's Hardware Survey, there are only about 3% of users still using DX9 cards (32.79% are DX10, 50.89% are DX11). The only reason they still have DX9 support is because of the consoles (and that will change come next-gen).


----------



## AshuraZro (Nov 12, 2012)

Then congrats on totally missing the boat, folks. The point here is that Windows 8 will include 11.1 only is not the end of the damn world. Devs are not going to sit there and make 11.1 only games and publishers sure as shit won't. They are going to make them for the majority market. You're perfectly correct that XP is going out to the pastures and DX9 will go with it but that isn't reason to care about 11.1 being Windows 8 only.


----------



## Rydian (Nov 12, 2012)

DX10 and up not backwards compatible with DX9 though, and it's been taking game companies ages to move their rendering engines over to DX10.  The early examples of "DX10" games like Crysis weren't, they were DX9 games with DX10 shaders on top (contributing to the terrible performance).  Even now many companies are still holding off from "crossing the line", and including both <=DX9 and DX10+ rendering engines is too expensive.

_Generally_ you can tell if a game is using a DX10+ rendering engine if the requirements specifically list DX10 (as DX10+ cards on XP and such work in DX9 mode), but as with Crysis, they can fudge the details.

Anyways I have my doubts about the app store, but the metro interface and the possibility of lock-in are the big killers.  Like, Windows 8 could give free fellatio via a USB port dongle, and I would still hesitate until those issues are solved.


----------



## DCG (Nov 12, 2012)

One positive thing about 8.
My acers battery lasted almost an entire day... Forgot to shut it down propperly and put it on my dest at 12pm.
At 17.50 I noticed the acer was on in my bag (it was warm...) Battery had degraded till 7%, but it was still running :s
(only the screen was off the entire time).


But anyway, other than ISO's, battery life (how is that relevant if I use a power plug??), some other system performance upgrades. Windows 8 it too much "In your face bitch, buy a tablet!".

And I guess the start button is just the beginning, if people don't complain, the "classic homescreen" will probably disappear too...
(Why the hell don't they give you the option to configure metro, aero etc. during instalation?)


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 12, 2012)

NahuelDS said:


> that's why ChromeOS exists


I would rather severly harm myself with a rusty spoon than call a glorified web browser an OS and actually use it. Seriously, Android has a deeper level of complexity.


----------



## Nah3DS (Nov 12, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> I would rather severly harm myself with a rusty spoon than call a glorified web browser an OS and actually use it. Seriously, Android has a deeper level of complexity.


That "glorified web browser" saved me hours of: _"hi my son, how do I turn on the internet?"_
believe me... that's the OS that goes on your gradma's notebook


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 13, 2012)

NahuelDS said:


> That "glorified web browser" saved me hours of: _"hi my son, how do I turn on the internet?"_
> believe me... that's the OS that goes on your gradma's notebook


Ah, yes - that's the perfect target audience for it, here we agree. If you don't want to do anything productive in your life and don't want to use even a fraction of the computer's full potential or aren't capable to do so, ChromeOS is the perfect choice.


----------



## Nah3DS (Nov 13, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> If you don't want to do anything productive in your life and don't want to use even a fraction of the computer's full potential or aren't capable to do so, ChromeOS is the perfect choice.


with Facebook as your homepage


----------



## Fishaman P (Nov 13, 2012)

I get that they're trying to force us to upgrade, but this is just terrible.
The one market that Windows 8 didn't appeal to was gamers (wait, reverse that; nope, that's wrong too, no one likes Win8).

WE NEED DX11.1!
If not that, then we DEFINITELY need DX12.


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 13, 2012)

Fishaman P said:


> I get that they're trying to force us to upgrade, but this is just terrible.
> The one market that Windows 8 didn't appeal to was gamers (wait, reverse that; nope, that's wrong too, no one likes Win8).
> 
> WE NEED DX11.1!
> If not that, then we DEFINITELY need DX12.


That's odd, since Windows 8 was developed with games as one of its main focuses, it has a myriad of hidden "tweaks" for developers to use and, of course, now DX11.1, not to mention that the whole Metro UI smells of XBox 360 from a mile.


----------



## VMM (Nov 13, 2012)

Steam is coming to Linux.
I don't give a fuck about Windows 8 or Directx.
We still have OpenGL


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 13, 2012)

VMM said:


> *Steam is coming to Linux.*


Enjoy the *two dozen *games you're getting so-far.

Availability of games is not in Valve's hands unless it's their own titles - everything else depends on the developers.

*EDIT: *My bad.


----------



## Ritsuki (Nov 13, 2012)

Hmmm... I can upgrade my PC for free (thanks to the MSDN-AA partnership) but I'm really hesitating now. First time I saw W8, I was like "I'll NEVER install it". TBH, W8 biggest "problem" is that the new interface is way too _touchscreeny_ imho. But if it's really that well optimized, I might go for it.


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 13, 2012)

Ritsuki said:


> Hmmm... I can upgrade my PC for free (thanks to the MSDN-AA partnership) but I'm really hesitating now. First time I saw W8, I was like "I'll NEVER install it". TBH, W8 biggest "problem" is that the new interface is way too _touchscreeny_ imho. But if it's really that well optimized, I might go for it.


My rule is "don't judge a book by it's cover". You can try it out for free - go for it. Won't cost you anything and you'll know for sure whether it's a system for you or not. I personally see a huge improvement performance-wise, I'm still trying to get used to the GUI, but it's only getting easier now that I realized that regardless of whether or not the search bar is up, I can just start typing the program's name and it will automatically display matches from the apps list, which is quite darn quick as I type faster than I use the mouse.


----------



## VMM (Nov 13, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Enjoy the *two dozen *games you're getting so-far.
> 
> Availability of games is not in Valve's hands unless it's their own titles - everything else depends on the developers.
> 
> *EDIT: *My bad.


 
Valve is creating a console running ubuntu,
and using steam.
Prepare to see a sea of games coming to linux next year.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Nov 13, 2012)

VMM said:


> Valve is creating a console running ubuntu,
> and using steam.
> Prepare to see a sea of games coming to linux next year.


 
Uh, source please?


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 13, 2012)

VMM said:


> Valve is creating a console running *ubuntu*,
> and using steam.
> Prepare to see a sea of games coming to linux next year.


Well, damn. Good luck with that then, please enjoy your experience (provided it is true, of course).


----------



## raulpica (Nov 13, 2012)

Really nice thread, there was a constructive debate, with sides pro-Win8 and anti-Win8 argumenting their views in a civil and reasoned way.

If only some other threads would go this way too! 

I'll switch over to Win8 with my next PC, along with a nice SSD. Can't miss the new boat. I don't particularly care about DX11.1, as most games will keep using DX11 for at least 3-4 years anyway


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 13, 2012)

raulpica said:


> Really nice thread, there was a constructive debate, with sides pro-Win8 and anti-Win8 argumenting their views in a civil and reasoned way.
> 
> If only some other threads would go this way too!
> 
> I'll switch over to Win8 with my next PC, along with a nice SSD. Can't miss the new boat. I don't particularly care about DX11.1, as most games will keep using DX11 for at least 3-4 years anyway


Pretty sure that (as the name implies) DX11.1 is an add-on for DX11 - it merely adds new features and polishes some old ones.

If the developers want proper stereoscopic 3D and other wonderful gimmicks, they'll have to include the extra functionality, and hence it's easy to check DX version, as seen by DX9-DX10 cross-compatible games, I don't think it's a long shot to assume that games could very well start using those extra features the moment developers start preparing for the upcoming PS4 and the XBox 720... because let's not lie to ourselves - consoles overtook the industry this generation.


----------



## pwsincd (Nov 13, 2012)

i recall earlier this year valve said they would dev hardware if they had to , or something ... cant recall fully why they said that , but i didnt see no news of worth since.


----------



## VMM (Nov 13, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Uh, source please?


 
http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/03/03/report-valve-developing-steam-box-console
http://davestechsupport.com/blog/2012/10/29/valves-big-switch-to-linux/

I've had better sources, but they are written in brazilian portuguese.


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 13, 2012)

pwsincd said:


> i recall earlier this year valve said they would dev hardware if they had to , or something ... cant recall fully why they said that , but i didnt see no news of worth since.


Steambox, coming to your living room in 2056 - launch titles? Half-Life 3 and Counter Strike: Source 2.


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 13, 2012)

VMM said:


> http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/03/03/report-valve-developing-steam-box-console
> http://davestechsupport.com/blog/2012/10/29/valves-big-switch-to-linux/


All this means is that they *may* develop a console and they *are* porting Steam to Linux - we all know that. It doesn't mean that everything they have to offer on Steam will work.


----------



## pwsincd (Nov 13, 2012)

We all indeed do know that , and of course it doesnt mean that . its a reference to the fact that i had heard of the news VMM suggested and that Guild pondered , and that consequently jogged my failing memory


----------



## DanielJavierGuzz (Nov 13, 2012)

Feels Good Man said:


>


This gif should be something like "Direct x 11.1..... exclusive for windows 8"


----------



## Deleted-236924 (Nov 13, 2012)

Qtis said:


> ps. Running Windows XP on a virtual machine is a good option if you really need to use it for something (gaming for me). Otherwise go for Windows 7/8. Especially if your computer is newer.


 
Lol gaming in a virtual machine.



RodrigoDavy said:


> Embrace the pain of Ubuntu!  (proud Ubuntu user)


I chuckled a bit.


----------



## Rydian (Nov 13, 2012)

Well pretty much all VMs now can access the CPU directly, and some of the big-name ones give direct access to the GPU as well.  My friend managed to run Project 64 with proper hardware acceleration in a VM (I believe it was virtualbox) on his Macbook Pro (since all the OSX N64 emulators suck)


----------



## RodrigoDavy (Nov 13, 2012)

One question, is Directx really that better than OpenGL so it would be worth upgrading to W8 just for that? Because according to Valve converting Left 4 Dead 2 to OpenGL made the game faster even on Windows.

http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/linux/faster-zombies/


----------



## DiscostewSM (Nov 13, 2012)

RodrigoDavy said:


>


 
I read that as "Get Your butt to 12.10!"


----------



## Rydian (Nov 13, 2012)

RodrigoDavy said:


> One question, is Directx really that better than OpenGL so it would be worth upgrading to W8 just for that? Because according to Valve converting Left 4 Dead 2 to OpenGL made the game faster even on Windows.
> 
> http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/linux/faster-zombies/


They'd likely get a nice performance increase from moving the game to purely-DX10(+) as well, like other things did.

DX9 is eight years old, and was built off of even older technologies.  It's just not the best thing nowadays.  It'd be like programming a DS game in BASIC or something.

OpenGL doesn't have that sort of issue because it's... it's different.  Even it's _goals_ are decidedly different than DirectX and other technologies of the time, and when it gets updated it doesn't carry years of crap with it like DirectX did through 9.

I don't know if I can sum this kind of stuff up in a few words, so perhaps this kind of crap holds the proper explanations.
http://www.graphics.stanford.edu/courses/cs448a-01-fall/lectures/lecture15/opengl.2up.pdf
http://webstaff.itn.liu.se/~matco/TNM053/Lectures/Lecture 02 - OpenGL.pdf
(Mainly the overviews).


----------



## YayMii (Nov 13, 2012)

Rydian said:


> DX9 is eight years old, and was built off of even older technologies. It's just not the best thing nowadays. It'd be like programming a DS game in BASIC or something.


Did you say programming DS games in BASIC? 

On a related note, how is gaming performance on Linux nowadays? I haven't used Linux since LM9 and I'm just curious if it's worth trying out.


----------



## Rydian (Nov 13, 2012)

Games are known to run slightly-better through WINE than on Windows, even though the API calls are being wrapped.  If the game has any DRM though, you're likely screwed unless you find a crack to totally remove the DRM (some simple disable cracks rely on the DRM functioning in the first place, which it will not on Linux)


----------



## Vanth88 (Nov 13, 2012)

_"Windows 8 is to receive Direct X 11.1 exclusively, with no plans to make it available for older versions of Microsoft’s OS. In response to the company’s position, a Microsoft employee has discussed the move on its official forum._

_Neowin reports that Microsoft employee Daniel Moth took to the Microsoft Answers forum to discuss the move, where he said, “Money money money, money? money! money money money money. Money money money.. money money. Money money money, kaching, kaching, money.”_


----------



## Qtis (Nov 13, 2012)

Pingouin7 said:


> Lol gaming in a virtual machine.


Mostly for older games which may need WinXP. I still have Win7 via bootcamp for newer games. Just too lazy to restart the computer every time


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 13, 2012)

Vanth88 said:


> _"Windows 8 is to receive Direct X 11.1 exclusively, with no plans to make it available for older versions of Microsoft’s OS. In response to the company’s position, a Microsoft employee has discussed the move on its official forum._
> 
> _Neowin reports that Microsoft employee *Daniel Moth* took to the Microsoft Answers forum to discuss the move, where he said, *“Money money money, money? money! money money money money. Money money money.. money money. Money money money, kaching, kaching, money.”*_




Good one, Moth!  ...seriously though, of course it's about money - Microsoft is a business, making money is the whole point.


----------



## VMM (Nov 13, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> All this means is that they *may* develop a console and they *are* porting Steam to Linux - we all know that. It doesn't mean that everything they have to offer on Steam will work.


 

I'll try to find the brazilian source I had and translate it to english.
In the source I'm talking about, there is a guy caled Julian Fernandes that work for canonical.
He talks about Steam Box, and that it will be running Ubuntu,
he also talks about why Valve chose Ubuntu, and
that the effort of porting it Linux, for the final goal as using ubuntu on Steam Box,


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 13, 2012)

VMM said:


> I'll try to find the brazilian source I had and translate it to english.
> In the source I'm talking about, there is a guy caled Julian Fernandes that work for canonical.
> He talks about Steam Box, and that it will be running Ubuntu,
> he also talks about why Valve chose Ubuntu, and
> that the effort of porting it Linux, for the final goal as using ubuntu on Steam Box,


Right. To put it in understandable terms, Steam is a distribution channel with a built-in communication infrastructure for players to use - it's not running your game binaries. To run the binaries, they have to be native to your OS or pass through a compatibility layer like WINE. Steam does not have the other option - it merely allows you to purchase binaries that were already compiled and chat - it is not launching games within itself as an environment, it merely interfaces with them. The games would have to be recompiled for a new platform - ported in order to work. Otherwise, said games would have to run through a compatibility layer. Don't expect a sea of games.


----------



## ov3rkill (Nov 13, 2012)

Next thing you know, we will be forced to upgrade to Windows 8 when a game comes out exclusive for Windows 8 or directX 11.1.


----------



## pwsincd (Nov 13, 2012)

Right. To put it in understandable terms, Steam is a distribution channel with a built-in communication infrastructure for players to use - it's not running your game binaries. To run the binaries, they have to be native to your OS or pass through a compatibility layer like WINE. Steam does not have the other option - it merely allows you to purchase binaries that were already compiled and chat - it is not launching games within itself as an environment, it merely interfaces with them. The games would have to be reconsilde for a new platform - ported in order to work. Otherwise, said games would have to run through a compatibility layer = website


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 13, 2012)

pwsincd said:


> a compatibility layer = website


Excuse me, what?

You want to play contemporary titles over a website, is that what you're saying?


----------



## AlanJohn (Nov 13, 2012)

It's time to move to OpenGl.
The year of the Linux desktop is coming, my friends.


----------



## Ritsuki (Nov 14, 2012)

Got my copy of Windows 8, but still have a few questions before upgrading :

1) Are all programs that works on Seven and Vista compatible with W8 ? If yes, do they run in some kind of "emulator" or it's supported natively (for the "non-Metro friendly" programs) ?
2) Does the upgrade wipes everthing in the HDD/partition ?


----------



## Foxi4 (Nov 14, 2012)

Ritsuki said:


> Got my copy of Windows 8, but still have a few questions before upgrading :
> 
> 1) Are all programs that works on Seven and Vista compatible with W8 ? If yes, do they run in some kind of "emulator" or it's supported natively (for the "non-Metro friendly" programs) ?
> 2) Does the upgrade wipes everthing in the HDD/partition ?


1) Windows 8 *has* a Desktop - all programs that worked on 7 are compatible with 8, no "emulation" involved.
2) It does not - you get to choose whether you want to upgrade which will preserve settings etc. or perform a full installation which has the option to put your old settings in a Windows.old folder. It can perform a wipe, but it's not required.


----------



## Ritsuki (Nov 14, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> 1) Windows 8 *has* a Desktop - all programs that worked on 7 are compatible with 8, no "emulation" involved.
> 2) It does not - you get to choose whether you want to upgrade which will preserve settings etc. or perform a full installation which has the option to put your old settings in a Windows.old folder. If can perform a wipe if you want, but it's not required.


 
Thanks for your quick answer  I'll certainly update tomorrow and certainly share my impressions


----------



## VMM (Nov 14, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Right. To put it in understandable terms, Steam is a distribution channel with a built-in communication infrastructure for players to use - it's not running your game binaries. To run the binaries, they have to be native to your OS or pass through a compatibility layer like WINE. Steam does not have the other option - it merely allows you to purchase binaries that were already compiled and chat - it is not launching games within itself as an environment, it merely interfaces with them. The games would have to be recompiled for a new platform - ported in order to work. Otherwise, said games would have to run through a compatibility layer. Don't expect a sea of games.


 
They are porting their games to work on linux.
And if the rumours about the console are true, soon or later many other developers would port their games to linux.
I'm being optimistic saying that there will be a sea of games coming to linux, 
but nothing denies that.

There is no reason in discussing an unknown future, so let's stop it.


----------

