Microsoft Clarifies: XNA Is Dying But DirectX Is Not





Add new comment




MS doesn't need Linux or OpenGL. That is the difference. They are the beggars and MS is the king. MS supports DX so thats where the money is going. Its true though that DX is feeling its age and should really switch to a new API but one that is going to help the end user get what it wants. DirectX 12? Who knows, as long as its going to make the experience better. Windows8? No thanks, i'll pass, maybe Windows12? In any case the consumer is forced to buy these OS's just to stay current, that is the real crime. We need to read between the lines.

OpenGL, iOS, Android... ring

OpenGL, iOS, Android... ring any bells? Of course not, you have no idea what you're saying. DirectX is feeling its age? Could you be any more ignorant? DirectX helping the END USER? My god you just went full retard. Do you even read what you write? Making consumers buy new products to stay current is a crime? Maybe you should stop buying smartphones, cars, clothes and just use whatever you have for the rest of your life. You are at the bottom of the intelligence pit, I'm surprised you can even write.

Do you?

Do you mean the kernel or the OS? In case you meant the OS, you truly have no idea what you're talking about. In case of the kernel, I hope for your sake the Apple community isn't going to read this.

You wouldn't have your

You wouldn't have your fucking internet if it weren't for a bunch of servers running either linux or a variation of unix. Might wanna pull your head out of your ass before you say something next time.


everyone moans about an operating systems but none of you can actually build one so why don't you all fuck off you sad pile of twats

Tisk, tisk

First paragraph one word does not belong. Also, I think MS should drop DirectX - there needs to be more focus on OpenGL. Linux is suffering, big time.

why wold they use boring old

why wold they use boring old tech? havent you noticed no games use opengl or any variation of it anymore. everything is being designed for directx. directx performs better than opengl ever could. and using directx keeps every gamer from needing two gtx690's just to play a game.


You did read the whole article, right? It was given at the time that on multiple platforms OpenGL superseded DirectX, the main differences were that OpenGL is harder to work with but has less passed to compute information so data could travel faster. And the other differences are: Microsoft have a rather large price tag with DirectX (market influence) so naturally developers such as Nvidia & AMD will cater for DirectX over OpenGL; Rage is a good example if you're an AMD user along with Nvidia releasing a driver that boosts OpenGL performance up to 50% on Linux since Steam was released for it... Developers follow the money and ease of use and DirectX has all of that, but non of that makes it any better than OpenGL.

Actually I read that the

Actually I read that the tests are skewed. Something about not fully utilizing everything on directx or certain in game features were not enabled on the Opengl side. I don't recall of the article though but that seems to kill the debate as i have yet to see this being mentioned again.

Add new comment