DirectX 10.1

[Xiahou]

This strikes me as another smooth PR move by Microsoft... not.

They've announced DX10.1 (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,2168429,00.asp?kc=ETRSS02129TX1K0000532)- great right? The thing is that it will add new features that will not be supported by any current DX10 graphics cards. Way to further fracture the market. :dizzy2:

To be clear, we're not talking about a DX10/9 style schism, but a curious move at this point nonetheless. Surely, this change was in the works for a long time now- why wasn't it included in the original DX10 spec? Now everyone who wants the bells and whistles, will yet again have to buy a new GPU. :wall:

[Bootsiuv]

Hmmm, hopefully most haven't sprung for that DX10 capable video card yet. I know that, out of all of my friend, I'm the only one who has bothered getting Vista, and that was only because it came on my new notebook.

I just recently bought a videocard for my gaming rig, and it isn't even DX10 capable, considering I'm leaving that rig on XP for at least another year, I wasn't too worried about it. I'm usually one-three steps behind the leading technology anyways, as I like to wait for things to come down in price.

DX10 will be wonderful, but I don't see it becoming a necessity until late 2008/early 2009, so I'm holding off on my monster of a video card until then, when I plan on upgrading my entire desktop.

[Husar]

Those who want all the bells and whistles will buy a new GPU anyway because of PCI-e 2.0 and they will buy a new mainboard for DDR3 support and they will buy a new octocore once they're out and they are rich anyway so why would they really care? ~;)

[Whacker]

I don't really see this as a huge issue. There are a ton of people, myself included, who've bought DX10 hardware. Hell there are very few games out right now that even support DX10, and Vista's sales are definitely less than spectacular.

My view is that we'll see a slow migration to the DX10 standard over the next year or two, and *maybe* some DX10.1 support as well. Devs and pubs are not going to risk pissing off customers because of this or limit their potential market, it's a surefire way not to make money.

[Xiahou]

I don't really see this as a huge issue. There are a ton of people, myself included, who've bought DX10 hardware. Hell there are very few games out right now that even support DX10, and Vista's sales are definitely less than spectacular.I have a DX10 card myself, but I bought it for it's DX9/openGL performance- not for DX10.

As I said, this isn't near as big as the DX9-DX10 split, but I still think it's a questionable move by MS.

[Watchman]

I think the guilty bastards (http://www.satirewire.com/news/0102/jackson.shtml) are famous for those.

Personally, I'm in no particular hurry to change my hardware anywhere (unless the box decides to suffer a catastrophic breakdown again), and will rather wait until they get the worst of these teething-problem messes over with. And there's an actual reason to start upgrading the system.

[TosaInu]

This strikes me as another smooth PR move by Microsoft... not.

They've announced DX10.1 (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,2168429,00.asp?kc=ETRSS02129TX1K0000532)- great right? The thing is that it will add new features that will not be supported by any current DX10 graphics cards. Way to further fracture the market. :dizzy2:


Not really nice. I guess it's indeed mostly the 'want have the latest' gamers that purchased the DX 10 cards for DX10/Vista and they'll probably upgrade anyway (perhaps they even welcome the excuse), but for some it must be a bucket of cold water.

[Whacker]

I have a DX10 card myself, but I bought it for it's DX9/openGL performance- not for DX10.

Same here. Vista isn't going to pollute my system for quite a while.


As I said, this isn't near as big as the DX9-DX10 split, but I still think it's a questionable move by MS.

I agree with the core of your argument, but still believe that in the end it won't turn out to be as big of a deal. If anything, the current gamer/user base may raise enough of a ruckus and throw a big enough fit, and MS may be forced to back down on that. Who knows?

[Bootsiuv]

I'd rather they didn't back down on it....new features are always welcome as far as I'm concerned. They probably won't be utilized for a year or two, so what's the big deal? I think most PC gamers update their video cards at least once every 2 years anyways. It's almost mandatory if you want to be able to play the newest games at the highest available settings.

I don't worry too much about it...like I said, I'm quite comfortable being a few steps behind....I don't pay the inflated prices of brand new technology. It inevitably goes down in price, usually 1-2 years after it was introduced.