Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Graphics Windows Linux

DX11 Coming To Linux (But Not XP) 370

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the speaking-directly-to-you dept.
gr8_phk writes "As reported over at Phoronix, the Direct X 11 API now has an open source implementation on top of Gallium3d which should ease porting of games to Linux with or without Wine. While still in its infancy, you can see where this is heading. All this while Microsoft hasn't offered DX11 for their own aging WindowsXP. Could it be that Linux may soon support this Microsoft API better than Microsoft itself?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

DX11 Coming To Linux (But Not XP)

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @12:51PM (#33653028)

    You mean like CIFS as supported by SAMBA...

  • Interesting. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Beelzebud (1361137) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @12:55PM (#33653090)
    I'd love this, if it's true, and it performs on par with windows. However, I've learned to take Phoronix hype with a grain of salt. They're gaining reputation for making bold claims based on no facts.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @12:55PM (#33653094)

    It will spawn at least 4 universal APIs that are almost completely but not quite incompatible.

  • by ifiwereasculptor (1870574) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @12:57PM (#33653146)
    "Could it be that Linux may soon support this Microsoft API better than Microsoft itself?" Actually Linux could soon support Microsoft's latest API better than XP. That's possible. But not better than Microsoft. That's like saying Linux has always supported DX9 better than Microsoft itself because it wasn't present in Windows 3.1 (and neither in 3.11).
  • by Fulg (138866) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @01:04PM (#33653232) Homepage

    Yes. It seems very likely to me that an open-source implementation of a Microsoft API, and implementation "in its infancy", will soon surpass Microsoft's own offering.

    I was about to post the same thing. The summary is amazingly hasty in its conclusion... I mean, WINE has been at it for what, 10 years? They still don't have it working as well as the original. Not dissing WINE, but I mean, implementing the entry points of a published API is easy. Making it do the correct things under the hood is the hard part...

    That being said, I can certainly applaud the effort, but this should be news once it's working otherwise it's meaningless.

  • by armanox (826486) <asherewindknight@yahoo.com> on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @01:07PM (#33653280) Homepage Journal

    I'd say WINE has done quite nicely. Remember when WINE emulated Win 3.11? WINE's biggest problem is that it will forever be playing catch up.

  • "not XP" (Score:3, Insightful)

    by airfoobar (1853132) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @01:08PM (#33653294)
    I thought Gallium was mostly cross-platform, so it may be possible to port DX10/11 to XP.
  • Re:great idea (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Beelzebud (1361137) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @01:10PM (#33653342)
    RAM is still extremely relevant, it's just that a lot of PC's sold nowadays come with plenty. RAM becomes relevant when you don't have enough. :)
  • by Picass0 (147474) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @01:16PM (#33653408) Homepage Journal

    ... taking an established technology - embracing, extending, and finally engulfing, and uh... wait a sec. Wha?

  • Apples to Oranges (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Wrath0fb0b (302444) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @01:16PM (#33653412)

    Could it be that Linux may soon support this Microsoft API better than Microsoft itself?"

    Not until they backport this project to work with kernel 2.2.19, which was current when XP was released 9 years ago. Failing that, they should at least be honest and compare support among current implementations.

    It's one thing for people to chose XP for their recent builds -- more power to them for choosing whatever they like best. But when you deliberately chose a 9 year old OS, you lose the right to complain that you cannot run the latest DirectX in the same fashion that people still on kernel 2.2 (I'm sure there are in-use servers still running that) can complain they cannot run the CFS [slashdot.org].

  • by Gadget_Guy (627405) * on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @01:21PM (#33653474)

    I had a quick look at the system requirements for this project, and it said: "The following are required for DRI-based hardware acceleration with Mesa...Linux 2.6.28." This version was released nearly two years after Vista. I don't think that it can be said to support DirectX better than Microsoft when it can't run on a version that dates back to XP days.

    Now I think that it is great that they are doing this project, but saying it supports the API better than Microsoft only distracts from the developer's achievements.

  • Re:Interesting. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Beelzebud (1361137) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @01:22PM (#33653490)
    Except it's not a bold claim at all, to anyone that has read Phoronix for any amount of time. How's that Linux version of Steam coming along?
  • by JesseMcDonald (536341) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @02:09PM (#33654094) Homepage

    I don't think that it can be said to support DirectX better than Microsoft when it can't run on a version that dates back to XP days.

    Irrelevant. The latest Linux kernel is available for free, and can be upgraded without any compatibility issues or changes to the UI. Why would this project waste time redoing all the work which has already gone into kernel development? The odds that anyone would be interested in DX11 on Linux and simultaneously have a good reason not to upgrade their kernel are rather slim.

    Not to mention that the whole kernel is open-source, so if you really wanted to make it work you could probably backport the necessary DRI changes to an older kernel.

    There are good reasons for retaining XP on existing systems, not least of which are the facts that upgrading would cost several hundred dollars and force a major change in the user interface. You can't upgrade an XP system to a Vista or Windows 7 kernel with DX11 support while leaving the rest of the system intact. The situations are not comparable.

  • by TheRaven64 (641858) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @02:23PM (#33654286) Journal
    You must have a poor memory then. WINE implemented the Win16 API before they started on Win32. There was a time in the late '90s when you were more likely to get a Win16 app working on Linux than on Windows NT 4.
  • by MBGMorden (803437) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @02:25PM (#33654320)

    There are good reasons for retaining XP on existing systems, not least of which are the facts that upgrading would cost several hundred dollars

    Windows 7 Home Premium is only $99 from Newegg. Actually $89 today on sale. While I'm a die-hard Ubuntu user, I keep a copy of Windows around for gaming. As obvious, the price isn't what's keeping me from using Windows on my main machine. It's more an issue of Linux constantly improving in quality, whereas Windows seems to be going slowly downhill post-XP. Eventually they met in the middle and I found myself less frustrated in Linux compared to Windows. If I could get my gaming done on Linux, I'd love to toss the Windows machine completely.

  • by rgviza (1303161) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @02:29PM (#33654358)

    Not really. MS won't support it on XP because they are trying to get gamers to buy Windows 7ista. I'm sure the Windows 7 support for DX11 will be on par with the linux support.

    *note I'm not a windows fanboi, I just happen to have a firm grasp of reality. I do game on windows, but my development work is entirely FOSS based on linux systems.

  • by TheRaven64 (641858) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @02:52PM (#33654700) Journal
    Not sure why you'd compare DirectSound to ALSA. The direct analogue is OpenAL, which works on *NIX, Windows, and OS X. ALSA is a Linux-specific abomination driven by the NIH mentality prevalent among Linux kernel devs.
  • Re:Gre (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Frosty Piss (770223) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @02:56PM (#33654764)
    Not really. Microsoft has made it clear that support for XP is coming to a close.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @02:59PM (#33654822)

    299 and 320 in stores for Pro and Ultimate. Or 270 and 299. Regardless while not worse than Win 2k Pro/Xp Pro were back in the days, who has 300 bucks to throw down on an OPERATING SYSTEM in the current economy? That's 6 release day videogames, 18+ movies, up to 3 months of gas, half a month's rent. 3 dates with a gold digger, etc.

    There's a lot that you can do with 300 bucks besides get to see a windows logo and then find out you need a bigger hard disk and more ram :D

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @03:24PM (#33655190)

    Linux will support DX11 better than microsoft.

    XP: No support

    XP: Microsoft Windows

    Therefore Microsoft support of DX11 worse than Linux support of DX11.

    DO NOT use the generic when only a VERY SMALL subset of that generic works.

  • by paedobear (808689) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @07:10PM (#33657326)
    Windows 3.1 is still supported by MS (admittedly in certain embedded sitations rather than as a Desktop OS...)
  • Re:XP? Forget XP! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by nschubach (922175) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @07:21PM (#33657414) Journal

    We all have our different opinions. I've had Windows 7 for a little over a month now and I still find hacks to revert some things back to the way XP did it.

    * Reverted the "breadcrumb" address bar
    * Removed libraries
    * Flexible/robust install? I had no options during mine... There was basically a button that said "Install."
    * Had to remove the search box from Window header, wish I could remove/move the rest
    * Had to edit windows resource files to remove that stupid "command bar" with the organize/etc.
    * Installed Classic Shell to get my treeview lines back. Classic start menu was a bonus.
    * Had to clean up 15 or so folder shortcuts that didn't point to anything in my "user" folder.
    * Had to download a tweak program to remove the horrendously huge borders. Found out theme editing is a PITA, even with a program made for it. Wanted to reduce the button sizes. Couldn't find a decent theme out there.
    * Still hate going into the control panel. Try to manage things in "Computer" / Right-Click Manage so I don't have to go to the control panel.
    * Notice no real speed difference. (Seriously... I had XP installed to burn in my system, then switched to Win7...) SSD performs great on both systems.
    * I spent well over 10 times as much time making Windows 7 close to how I wanted it, XP was a breeze and two registry entries. Windows 7 is going on 10 registry edits + resource hacking + disabling so many services... I'm still not done.
    * The only thing I like about Windows 7 so far is the >4G RAM support without crazy settings and limits.
    * If you know how I can change the file click rename timing (or reverting back to the old file selection look and feel), I'd love to know it. I hate clicking on a file and hitting delete to have windows interpret that as me wanting to delete the filename.
    * As a gamer, I can't think of any games I've played that use DX11... or even 10 for that matter. Then again, there's been a terrible slump in games that excite me recently so I haven't been playing as much as I used to.
    * I'm sure there's more...

  • Re:XP? Forget XP! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mjwx (966435) on Wednesday September 22, 2010 @01:25AM (#33659388)

    * Better looking

    Debatable. I prefer XP's minimalist looks.

    * Fast

    Bollocks to that. I went from XP to 7 at work and now having 2 VM's running at once makes my entire system chug (E6600, 4 GB RAM, 2 windows VM's should run fine). 7 is only fast if you're doing nothing with it, utter shite resource management.

    * More options,

    If I want to change my network settings I have to navigate through 7 "helpful" windows wizards before being able to manually set my IP address. No Windows, I dont need you to diagnose the problem, I know the problem. What's that, you want me to contact my Systems Administrator, I AM THE SYSTEMS ADMINISTRATOR.

    * More robust, flexible & userfriendly install.

    Nothing wrong with the Windows 7 install, apart from the fact it installs Windows 7.

    * Support

    Clearly the GP has never tried to contact Microsft support. As an enterprise customer they've been nothing but useless.

    * UAE security

    Well you may consider United Arab Emirates security to be good but it's not what I look for in an OS. Introducing Windows Dubai, Burka edition.

    it's not as annoying as on Vista

    Its just as annoying, the only differnce is I can copy a file with just one UAC popup, not three. Still occurs far too often and takes over whatever I am doing.

    * Better driver support than Vista

    Win 7 default drivers for Asus and Gigabyte motherboards are atrocious, if they haven't published drivers for Vista or 7 for your board forget about upgrading.

    Now for the problems

    * Uses more system resources. Running VMware or playing games is severely affected.
    * USB Storage is more painful. Not just the "scan and fix" dialouge with each USB Drive but I installed the Android SDK and now it refuses to recongise my milestone as a Mass Storage device (only computer in the lab that does this)
    * UI demands more attention, default settings are painful.
    * Important system config utilities are hidden behind bad and useless wizard.

    If they can get DX 11 working OK on Linux, I'll ditch Windows 7.

  • Re:XP (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 22, 2010 @01:34AM (#33659422)

    And DOS is faster than XP.

  • Re:XP? Forget XP! (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 22, 2010 @10:39AM (#33663302)

    DX11 is not a technical reason to prefer 7, since there is no technical reason why DX11 isn't running on their OS with the biggest installed base.

"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." -- Albert Einstein

Working...