"DirectX 10 would not work with XP, and that was fine and dandy. It was an honest technical reason why you could not backport DX10 to XP without a major rip and replace operation. Microsoft wasn't going to bend on this one at all." More here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-05-26
I vote that archiesteel is awarded an "Entitle Mint" (you know, the one that tastes great to start, but causes everything else to taste worse than before because it doesn't mix well) for arguing on emotion and cutting every bit of logic out, attacking everyone, etc. and calling all logical rebuttals in the discussion "intellectually dishonest" and "intellectually lazy" and calling everyone "MS Shills" because people won't bend over and acknowledge his opinion as being consistent with how life should be.
Even if hit upside the head with an unbreakable Clue-By-4, it would only be a noisy affair, as nothing could possibly sink in to someone that only uses emotion and refuses to allow logic to seep in.
Everyone, at least on this point, we might as well give up attempting to convince archiesteel using any form of pursuasion: he simply is not amenable to any remote bit of logic, and he'll only scream bloody murder "That's not true!" based on emotions.
Member since:2005-07-02
Member since:2005-07-02
Member since:
2005-07-02
Sure, except that when Microsoft came out with DirectX 8 and DirectX 9, it backported it to Windows 98 and ME (which are as different from XP as XP is from Vista). In other words, MS *used* to backport DirectX to previous systems - heck, the last version to support Win98 and ME came out in December 2006! Oh, and contrary to your irrelevant claim that "if you want something new, you must pay", these updates to DirectX were free.