Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Graphics Windows Linux

DX11 Coming To Linux (But Not XP) 370

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This discussion has been archived.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 mark-t ( 151149 ) <> on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @01:51PM (#33653016) Journal

    Because I can't help but think that this may be some sort of scheme to put OpenGL out of the picture....

    I'm generally not one to presume conspiracy right off the bat, but there's something about this that just doesn't quite seem on the up-and-up, IMO.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @01:52PM (#33653040)

    Graphics are an issue but Sound is the item holding back games for Linux.

    If this can include a universal sound API then Microsoft will be in trouble.

  • by Beelzebud ( 1361137 ) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @01:56PM (#33653114)
    Except this isn't being done my MS. Like it or not, modern game companies are using Direct X more and more. OpenGL is already out of the picture, for the most part. With people like John Carmack now even coding in Direct X, it makes sense to try to get a solution for Linux.
  • great idea (Score:2, Interesting)

    by ILuvRamen ( 1026668 ) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @01:57PM (#33653148)
    If they seriously release some really nice games for Linux that use it, people will be all over this at least as a dual boot system. Gamers love it when they do something that takes their current hardware and makes it way faster without spending any money. Judging by how fast Ubuntu ran on a Pentium 3 I had, I'd say Linux frees up a little ram for gaming. I always thought they'd take off as a gaming platform if they really pushed it because it's free and fast which is always a plus for gaming.
  • by mewsenews ( 251487 ) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @02:03PM (#33653222) Homepage

    OpenGL is already out of the picture, for the most part.

    OTOH, Macs run OpenGL and are stereotyped as having an affluent user base. Blizzard still releases Mac versions of games. Steam for Mac launched in May. Not really "out of the picture" yet.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @02:27PM (#33653544)

    I only have a little GL experience myself, but I can tell you that the DX10 API is *vastly* better. Basically it takes all the OO pieces of GL like which is what modern GL code uses anyway (VBO's, FBO's etc) and throws out the requirement for you to have to deal with the very non-OO GL state machine. It's like the difference between C and Forth in that you no longer have to manage the stack of states yourself. Architecturally speaking, OpenGL's shaders are kind of weak (it basically requires the GLSL compiler as part of the driver) but in real-world terms it's pretty much a wash.

    That said, OpenGL has a far superior extension system where DX has bupkus, which lets OpenGL keep pace and sometimes set the pace. Someone seems to have lit a fire under Kronos, because OpenGL is iterating very fast (I'd even say too fast!) these days. But in API terms, it's still way behind.

  • With Gallium 3D? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Beelzebud ( 1361137 ) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @02:31PM (#33653576)
    How could Gallium 3D run Direct X 11 in any way that could be comparable to the native Windows client, when it doesn't even do basic 3d acceleration as good as the proprietary blobs?
  • by Bobakitoo ( 1814374 ) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @02:36PM (#33653672)
    In the Wine layer, Direct3D is only a warper to user-space opengl. This will allow Direct3D call, from Wine or otherwise, to talk in the most direct manner to the hardware. I doubt anyone will use Direct3D natively on Linux, except for the Wine developpers. Which already got all the missing DirectX parts that make Direct3D useful...
  • by fnj ( 64210 ) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @02:56PM (#33653934)

    As the developer claimed:

    the Direct3D 10/11 APIs are vastly better than OpenGL and can be supported with orders of magnitude less code and development time

    I call BULL SHIT. I call it loudly and I call it with a big raspberry. Because: OH REALLY??? ONE HUNDRED or more times more code and development time? Thats what "orders of magnitude" with an "s" means.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @02:57PM (#33653956)

    DirectX 10+ is vastly superior to what is available on Linux for writing apps,

    1. Direct3D - OpenGL is OK. It's not the largest problem after all!

    2. DirectInput - what is the Linux analogy? Using X.Org shitty API? It's akin to using Windows' WM_KEYPRESS and similar messages to do keyboard interface, except it's even more cryptic. X.Org is OK for desktop apps, like Win32 API is OK for desktop apps, but that's about it.

    3. DirectSound - let's not even get started on the horrendous crap ALSA has become. It's a prime example of *over-engineered*, unusable project. Hell, even my headset returns multiple interfaces while in fact it is 2 channels OUT, 1 channel IN. Yet in Alsa it has a shit ton of options that are completely useless, like emulating 7.1 input. WTF??

    Here's more proof how crap ALSA is,

    Even the documentation is a mess. Click on high level control interface and you get a blank page!

    Going from a different path (modules => high level interface), thus ignoring the main navigation page gets me a page with NO overview, *nothing*.

    ALSA is one of many OSS projects that makes me ashamed of OSS. You look at projects like PostgreSQL that has *clear* and *concise* documentation available,

    to something like ALSA, and you want to cry. ALSA looks like overengineered project by a 20 year old that simply ignored making any documentation. Winsauce!

    DirectX is NOT only about graphics. It's too bad that Linux/XOrg tends to be barely about graphics and almost nothing about the rest.

    And I'm speaking as someone that uses Linux 100% of the time.

  • Re:At Long Last (Score:3, Interesting)

    by skine ( 1524819 ) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @03:22PM (#33654270)

    Because "corn" means a large grain.

    Such as peppercorns, barleycorns, maize corns or (such as in the naming of corned beef), salt corns.

  • Re:"not XP" (Score:3, Interesting)

    by airfoobar ( 1853132 ) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @03:32PM (#33654402)
    If you are describing what I think you are describing, then they may not be too difficult to write. If you consider the market share that XP still has, it would be a very worthwhile project.
  • by MBGMorden ( 803437 ) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @03:56PM (#33654772)

    The OEM version is available with any hardware purchase. My understanding is that to meet the requirement when ordering just the software they'll throw in a tiny "hardware" component (usually a screw or a cable) to legitimize it. If you have ANY other piece of hardware in your order though then even that is not needed.

    In regard to features, you have a point there, though several features that were limited to the "Professional" version of XP (such as SMP support) have migrated to the "Home" version of Windows 7. That's assuming they were even using XP Pro. I know a lot of people that were using XP Home just fine. And if you really do need Professional, then the OEM Windows 7 Pro is only $40 more than Home Premium.

  • by The Mgt ( 221650 ) on Tuesday September 21, 2010 @04:53PM (#33655548)

    MS won't support it on XP because they are trying to get gamers to buy Windows 7ista.

    Doesn't work though. Look at how many Windows games are written for the Xbox360 and are therefore run fine with Directx9.

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

    by Carewolf ( 581105 ) on Wednesday September 22, 2010 @12:34PM (#33664394) Homepage

    That doesn't seem that different, even back with Windows 2000 started the standard post-install/reinstall procedure:
    * Folder tweaking (show hidden files, file extensions, otherwise it was impossible to see if something was an executable, icon or whatever)
    * TweakUI to improve responsiveness of the UI (this is an official Microsoft tool though, just not shipped with OS).
    * Registry tweaking (In win2k and winxp only to disable auto-loading of all useless services installed by required crapware like DVD-players, file archives, PDF readers, etc.)
    * Enabling useful "eye-candy" (font antialiasing, and more), disable useless eye-candy (oversized borders, slow animations, etc).

    So nothing much changed, it only got slightly worse.

This universe shipped by weight, not by volume. Some expansion of the contents may have occurred during shipment.