Why you have to install a new Windows OS to upgrade the DirectX Version?

[theFOoL]

As far as i know it was Only Windows 98SE that was the Only Upgraded OS to have this feature cause W8.1 didn't as far as i know. Why can't they just have a downloadable installer?

 

[newtekie1]

Because Microsoft is a software company. Their primary source of income is selling software. If they just patched in all the new features to the older OS, then there would be no reason to buy new software, and they'd go out of business.

 

[theFOoL]

Ok but i see a lot of people staying with 7 still so

 

[dorsetknob]

As far as i know it was Only Windows 98SE that was the Only Upgraded OS to have this feature cause W8.1 didn't as far as i know. Why can't they just have a downloadable installer?

Because Microsoft is a software company. Their primary source of income is selling software. If they just patched in all the new features to the older OS, then there would be no reason to buy new software, and they'd go out of business.

Ok but i see a lot of people staying with 7 still so

Your find because Microsoft is in the Business of Selling/leasing software and their plans for the Future include windows (functions) as a Service
some Features and current functions like Directx will in the future be SOLD as an UPGRADE SERVICE.

 

[theFOoL]

As far as i know I'm OK with games @Medium Settings but for others they'd want the best of graphics and FPS. As long as i see 45 I'm good

 

[P4-630]

As far as i know I'm OK with games @Medium Settings but for others they'd want the best of graphics and FPS. As long as i see 45 I'm good

You were asking about directX...
About the FPS you'll get depends mainly on your computer hardware.

 

[slozomby]

As far as i know it was Only Windows 98SE that was the Only Upgraded OS to have this feature cause W8.1 didn't as far as i know. Why can't they just have a downloadable installer?

you can download the installer. its called the windows 10 upgrade wizard. and it was free for over a year. and it can still be had for free.

 

[theFOoL]

I have All OS's (Xp, Vista, 7, and 10) in a 4 Partition Lay-Out Xp is my main OS. 10 is actually pretty good so.

 

[silentbogo]

As far as i know it was Only Windows 98SE that was the Only Upgraded OS to have this feature cause W8.1 didn't as far as i know. Why can't they just have a downloadable installer?

And what about Vista with DX10, and semi-unsuccessful incentive to upgrade for the sake of Halo 2 Vista port?
You know, back in a day people had to spend upwards of hundred dollars to upgrade an 8 y.o. OS. Now it's pretty much free, and people are still finding reasons to complain.

BTW, I still remember an awful attempt at repackaging DX10 to Windows XP. By the time it was somewhat working - Windows 7 came out and no one cared anymore

 

[KainXS]

They've done it many times and I think its to get more software sales and to get more consumers off of the old windows version so they don't have to support it really.(also saves money) In the old days though you could throw in a new video card and get a higher DX version if you ran the DX updater If I remember correctly but even then there was a limit.

 

[64K]

Like others have said MS wants you to buy upgrades. They did that with Vista too by making DX10 only work with Vista and now it's DX12 with Win 10. I really don't believe that MS is just going to let us sit on Win 10 year after year without coming up with some way to sell us upgrades or turn Windows into a service that has to be paid for like Office 365 but we'll see.

 

[theFOoL]

Yeah but Vista hasn't been so kind with my hardware as at times it can either be a slow at start-up where i get a blank screen at start-up and i need to restart.

 

[alucasa]

Things keep moving on. That's the nature of life. Questioning that is like questioning why time moves on.

 

[64K]

Yeah but Vista hasn't been so kind with my hardware as at times it can either be a slow at start-up where i get a blank screen at start-up and i need to restart.

Well it's better than it was on release. I was an early adopter with Vista and it definitely had problems. It didn't help any that quite a few hardware manufacturers were slow to issue drivers that played well with Vista.

 

[slozomby]

or turn Windows into a service that has to be paid for like Office 365 but we'll see.

not so much a service but smaller less expensive updates.

 

[newtekie1]

Xp is my main OS

OMG Why?!

There is no good reason to still be using XP.

 

[64K]

OMG Why?!

There is no good reason to still be using XP.

Agreed. I don't think it's a good idea to even be on the internet running XP anymore. Vulnerabilities don't get patched anymore.

 

[silentbogo]

OMG Why?!

There is no good reason to still be using XP.

There is one I can think off: creating a honeypot for luring hackers!

I remember last time, about 4-5 months ago, I've been trying to convince the management of the local govt. office to give up Windows XP and upgrade their PCs as soon as possible, but it was like talking to the wall.
They were perfectly fine with their "sometimes rebooting" and "making weird noise" computers (which is why I was originally called, besides sorting through a closet of old appliances). And the main argument: "We have an expensive proprietary software that runs ONLY on XP."

An entire fleet of P4's powered by the oldest usable OS were connected to the internet, and contained a bunch of architectural plans and financial records not meant for public.
A previous IT guy even set up external (khm... exposed/naked) access with some prehistoric third-party RDP server on 3 out of 8 computers, so he won't have to go to the office to fix occasional problems....

 

[theFOoL]

Well let's see...

-I have the last Version of Opera, Chrome and the Latest version of FireFox
-I have OpenOffice installed
-VLC as my Video Player (Though i have K-Lite installed to use with WMP10 and NOT 11)
-I used a FreePartitionSoftware for Xp to create my 3 Partitions

And i'm quite happy still. Have Avir-Anti-Virus so yeah Life's Good

 

[alucasa]

Then stick with what your guts tell you. Don't need to ask us when your mind is firmly set.

 

[theFOoL]

But this Thread was meant for DirectX and why not just create a Installer for it instead of releasing a new OS so let's move on here. I understand MS is for Software making money but why not just make a installer-upgrade for every OS but let us keep what we have? I understand that it'd be easy to hack but come-on!

 

[alucasa]

Your question was already answered. As a software company, Microsoft has to give end-users a reason to upgrade.

Besides, it's sometimes better just to trash old codes and start anew as a new OS. Code rewrites so to speak and getting rid of legacy codes.

 

[Jetster]

If its what I think your talking about. Its not just DirectX its much more complicated and requires support, that and the developers want to get paid through licensing

 

[dorsetknob]

But this Thread was meant for DirectX and why not just create a Installer for it instead of releasing a new OS

but why not just make a installer-upgrade for every OS

Microsoft Did just that they do release a downloadable Re-distributable installer

Its just that different DirectX versions are restricted by microsoft to Different O/S
The Version you install has to be Supported by your O/S

Many Games often include Different DirectX installers on the Supplied DVD ( for Multiple O/S ) eg X86 O/S or X64 O/S
correct one gets installed if its Needed

 

[silentbogo]

Vista introduced WDDM, hence was the first one to support DX10.
Win10 was the first to feature WDDM 2.0, which is required for DX12 to properly function.
WDDM 2.1 is a mandatory requirement for SM6.0 and upcoming HDR10 boom, which at this moment is only supported by Win10 Anniversary Ed.

DirectX is a Microsoft product, so every next version is tightly dependent on other components of the OS and architectural advances (kernel, drivers etc.).
So, it is not just marketing, though it plays a major role in it.