Quote Originally Posted by Bijo
There are some threads that sometimes refer to this business, but not really specifically how I want it.

So how are you going to deal with this stuff? I've read that DX9.0L (or EX) is going to be used by Windows XP as well as Vista, but I'm not sure 'bout it. I myself ain't gonna get Vista 'cause it looks like not only will it be a memory hog, it'll also not really provide any serious new system functionality (if I ain't mistaken). Th'only thing (personally seen at least) significant enough about Vista, to upgrade, is DX10.

So then comes the question: is DX10 really worth it? Is it really a major improvement compared to DX9? What are the real benefits?

That's how market and capitalism function. Sooner or later (I will later as much as possible) you will have to transit to DX10. They will force you. Hardware and software companies work together - we bring you hardware and you bring us games for that. If you want to play game how God demand, you need to buy new hardware. I hate that but what can we do about it!

I don't like Vista because of very high hardware resources but that's the price for technology improvement.

This insanity will not soon stop...

Quote Originally Posted by Bijo
I myself think DX9 is quite capable of pulling off things DX10 can do, but that's only based on various informations found 'round the net - stuff I recall.

Also another question: do you think they've made the most of DX9 up to now or can it be improved even more? DX9.0L comes to mind when I think of this, but ah...
DX10 is drastically better. I watched short preview of Crisis in German GIGA TV and it looks unreal!

For some 20 years computer graphics will be like reality.

Quote Originally Posted by Bijo
And what about OpenGL? I hardly encounter games that need OpenGL, as DX dominates. Q: is OpenGL better/faster than DirectX (or could it be better if it's not at the moment)?
Still there are games which use OpenGL. I think every game from id Software use it.