Apple being anticompetitive yet again.

[cleverlymadeup]

*sigh*

Without rewriting Windows XP from the groundup (which is practically impossible), it would be impossible for DX10 to work.

Read, read, read:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa480220.aspx
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Display_Driver_Model

right and m$, who was convicted of antitrust (several times), is to be trusted? they've lied and been caught lying many times

funny that the wikipedia article has a big warning stating it's in need of an expert on the subject to clarify it, which means they don't trust the sources they have

also updating a graphical driver framework is possible to do in a pre-existing system, it's something known as a patch

 

[fangoram]

I find apple is over priced. for school we had a number of options that we had to pick from through the school and the macs were 0ver $300 more and not quite as good spec wise. granted the pcs aren't that great either

 

[Byrne]

Just out of curiosity, is there any reason Spore couldn't run on Tiger?

 

[theklng]

why i hate apple? overpriced goods, bad goods, the notion that if you have to change the battery on your iphone, you have to send it back to them, and so on, blabla. lots of the same fucking negative stuff. though, the reason i don't like apple the most is because they choose looks over performance and/or compatability. also, their fanbase seem to be composed entirely by people with IQs below 100.

there's been one guy who pretty much nailed apple for what the fanbase is:

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=macs_cant

 

[Byrne]

Also, is it not anticompetitive not to sell the OS separately, forcing you to buy the hardware from Apple?

 

[cleverlymadeup]

Being convicted of antitrust and being trustworthy are two completely different things. And Microsoft has no reason, motive, or advantage to lie to the developers who they rely upon for their OS ecosystem to actually work.

sure they do it's so they can sell and push vista on ppl, aka they want to make more money so they lie about features and what their os "can" or "can't" do, it's not like they haven't done it before

try looking up the smb protocol and the euro antitrust thing for a little more clarity on what they've claimed their os "can" and "can't" do and then is "magically" able to do once the threat of millions of dollars in fines are levied against them

also updating a graphical driver framework is possible to do in a pre-existing system, it's something known as a patch

http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/wpf/thread/02dbd024-d45b-4ce0-8301-f04edc90f05e/

...But do you have any contrasting proof of this?

well linux, bsd and mac can all do it, i'm pretty sure that microsoft can as well, it's what service packs are for

Every source I have read has said that it is completely impossible, without an extensive and utterly pointless rehaul of the OS, to port WDDM to XP.

That's why attempts to port DreamScene to XP just don't compare in terms of resources used. In fact, XP, with its lack of WDDM, takes up far more resources in trying to emulate Vista WDDM features like HD DreamScene wallpaper, multiple layers of transparency, or taskbar previews of HD video.

But no, post some proof, since you know, the burden rests upon you.

ok so you'll only post m$ backed links, who have a vested interest in pushing their new os on ppl and getting rid of the old one

they could easily have a dx10 version running as fast if m$ wants but they wish to push vista, hence why they say "it can't be done", if they had open protocols and documentation then yes it would be very easy to make dx10

 

[Byrne]

^ Prove it?

 

[Byrne]

No answer, lawl.