Wednesday, August 8th 2012

Intel Gears Software Developers Up for Windows 8

Press Release by
btarunr
 Discuss (22 Comments)
Ahead of Microsoft Windows 8 general availability, Intel has updated two toolkits for application developers - Intel Media SDK 2012 R3 and Intel SDK for OpenCL Applications 2013 Beta. In addition to Windows 8, Intel Media SDK also supports DirectX 11 with optimized access to hardware accelerated video encoding, decoding and transcoding for applications on 3rd Generation Intel Core processors.

The Intel SDK for OpenCL Applications Beta now supports OpenCL 1.2 API previews on CPU and other features such as a new kernel builder and GNU project debugger, which ease the creation of parallel and visual computing apps. Both kits support the new Intel HD Graphics Driver for Windows 8 and are available now as free downloads.

Related News

Add your own comment

22 Comments on Intel Gears Software Developers Up for Windows 8

#1
DanishDevil
Windows 8 can die a more painful death than Vista did.
Posted on Reply
#2
hellrazor
I hope it never gains life to experience death.
Posted on Reply
#4
deleted
I really don't understand all of the hate for Windows 8. Apart from the Start Menu, which is admittedly pretty terrible, it's better in every way than Windows 7. Honestly, though, how much time do you really spend with the Start Menu open? I usually just type in a couple of letters of the program I want to open and press enter. I spend a total of maybe 30 seconds a day with the Start Menu open, and that's a very generous estimate.
Posted on Reply
#5
hellrazor
deletedI really don't understand all of the hate for Windows 8. Apart from the Start Menu, which is admittedly pretty terrible, it's better in every way than Windows 7.
If I say "Fisher Price: My First Windows" and what you imagine is exactly the same as an OS that's coming out except for the theme, the OS is a piece of crap.
deletedHonestly, though, how much time do you really spend with the Start Menu open? I usually just type in a couple of letters of the program I want to open and press enter. I spend a total of maybe 30 seconds a day with the Start Menu open, and that's a very generous estimate.
If you're just going to type in what program you're using, why aren't you using a CLI?
Posted on Reply
#6
TheMailMan78
Big Member
DanishDevilWindows 8 can die a more painful death than Vista did.
Vista wasn't even bad. More mob mentality please.
Posted on Reply
#7
Wrigleyvillain
PTFO or GTFO
It was at first and pre-SP1. Wasn't quite ready for prime time but that was other developer's fault as much as MS. Most of the true headaches and issues were in the enterprise market.
Posted on Reply
#8
deleted
Honestly, I think Windows 8 is *less* Fisher Price than Windows 7. There's no more round, childproof corners on the windows, the cute bubbly start orb is gone, and the entire UI is more angular and masculine.

And although I have no issues with using the CLI, I think you're blatantly misrepresenting the use of the keyboard at the start menu. It's much faster and more accurate than flailing around with the mouse, and being able to use both hands (whether both on the keyboard or one on the keyboard and one on the mouse) is a huge gain for productivity.
Posted on Reply
#9
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
I think the Start Meny was actually better in Windows XP than Vista/7. However, Vista/7 changed how you did things (at least for a lot of people) and when you do that it's quite a lot better. I'm not a fan of 8's Start Screen, but if you're not using the keyboard already you missed out on Vista/7. 8 is more evolution than enything else.
Posted on Reply
#10
TheMailMan78
Big Member
WrigleyvillainIt was at first and pre-SP1. Wasn't quite ready for prime time but that was other developer's fault as much as MS. Most of the true headaches and issues were in the enterprise market.
Naa. People hate change. They want the same thing over and over again just faster. Then they bitch about a lack of innovation and how everything is the same. Then they say developers are just milking the market and why should they pay for the same thing again only faster. Then the arguments for piracy begin. "Its not worth paying for. Ill just pirate it".

Then a developer does something new and all we hear is "OMG its not what I'm used too! Its new and I don't understand it fully right to begin with. I MUST BASH IT". Then the developer goes back to the proven solution and people call it innovative and the circle continues.

Bunch of brainless sheeple.
Posted on Reply
#11
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
TheMailMan78Naa. People hate change. They want the same thing over and over again just faster. Then they bitch about a lack of innovation and how everything is the same. Then they say developers are just milking the market and why should they pay for the same thing again only fast. Then the arguments for piracy begin. "Its not worth paying for. Ill just pirate it".

Then a developer does something new and all we hear is "OMG its not what I'm used too! Its new and I don't understand it fully right to begin with. I MUST BASH IT". Then the developer goes back to the proven solution and people call it innovative and the circle continues.

Bunch of brainless sheeple.
There were issues man, you can't just ignore that. Some were Vista, a lot were 3rd party.
Posted on Reply
#12
TheMailMan78
Big Member
FrickThere were issues man, you can't just ignore that. Some were Vista, a lot were 3rd party.
New OS had teething issues? You don't say.
Posted on Reply
#13
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
TheMailMan78New OS had teething issues? You don't say.
Which is the point. Wrigleyvillain made a good point and you just "naaaah sheeple sheeple".
Posted on Reply
#14
TheMailMan78
Big Member
FrickWhich is the point. Wrigleyvillain made a good point and you just "naaaah sheeple sheeple".
The OS was fine. It was developers that were not on board. Yet MS gets the blame. You want to know OS problems? You guys are spoiled. Try using the very first OSX. Going from 9.2 to OSX was a NIGHTMARE. At least Vista would boot.
Posted on Reply
#15
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
TheMailMan78The OS was fine. It was developers that were not on board. Yet MS gets the blame. You want to know OS problems? You guys are spoiled. Try using the very first OSX. Going from 9.2 to OSX was a NIGHTMARE. At least Vista would boot.
It got fine after awhile, which is the entire point. I think we're talking different languages.
Posted on Reply
#16
TheMailMan78
Big Member
FrickIt got fine after awhile, which is the entire point. I think we're talking different languages.
The only issue I ever had was the Creative drivers. Thats it.
Posted on Reply
#17
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
TheMailMan78The only issue I ever had was the Creative drivers. Thats it.
And now we're in "it worked for me" territory, which is pretty irrelevant.
Posted on Reply
#18
TheMailMan78
Big Member
FrickAnd now we're in "it worked for me" territory, which is pretty irrelevant.
XP didn't have teething issues? Windows 7 didn't because guess what.......its Vista with just a different version number.

As for Vista not working I worked in a company that had 200+ computers upgraded to Vista 64-bit. IT guys never complained about a damn one of them. They LIKED the features it brought. People looked for the smallest thing to bash Vista because it fit into a the mob mentality of "Good, bad, good, bad" Windows releases. Not because it was really bad.
Posted on Reply
#19
shb-
Windows 8 is awesome, best windows so far. Even if you dont like it, win8 will invade your home and touch you while you are sleeping.
Posted on Reply
#20
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
TheMailMan78XP didn't have teething issues? Windows 7 didn't because guess what.......its Vista with just a different version number.

As for Vista not working I worked in a company that had 200+ computers upgraded to Vista 64-bit. IT guys never complained about a damn one of them. They LIKED the features it brought. People looked for the smallest thing to bash Vista because it fit into a the mob mentality of "Good, bad, good, bad" Windows releases. Not because it was really bad.
As I said, we're not talking to each other but over each other. And there's a reason the entire MS tech support department groaned when someone with Vista had problems with wireless networks.

Anyway. What was this thread about again?
Posted on Reply
#21
TheMailMan78
Big Member
FrickAnyway. What was this thread about again?
Seems like Intel is late getting these out.
Posted on Reply
#22
Prima.Vera
TheMailMan78Vista wasn't even bad. More mob mentality please.


Please, you have short memory... Let's refresh it a little.

Start with a laptop with 2GB of RAM that runs Win XP flawlessly. Installed Vista, this happened:

- 90% of drivers not compatible, so everything was mostly run in safe mode, including graphics
- takes 3/4more time to boot/load interface
- takes 10x more space for installing
- needs at least 4GB of RAM to run like Win XP running on 512MB
- high CPU usage - always
- HD space is getting lower and lower daily with MS junk
- 50% of WinXP software was incompatible with Vista

Can I stop now? :laugh::laugh:
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Apr 24th, 2024 11:59 EDT change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts