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

[theFOoL]

The only thing in the past i would of liked is from MS have made a Downloadable DirectX Installer for the current OS you'd be on to install the latest to what they'd release. Now let's say your Video Card waasn't meant for that? If we were to go back in time then i'd want every OS/Device backward compatible with whatever OS you'd have. ow i know that take lots of time and research so

 

[dorsetknob]

The only thing in the past i would of liked is from MS have made a Downloadable DirectX Installer for the current OS you'd be on to install the latest to what they'd release.

Read post #24 again it answers your ^^^^ Above Query

 

[silentbogo]

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/179113

 

[Solaris17]

It is one thing to hold Microsoft critically for the "need to upgrade for new features" and you would be right to a point. BUT while some decisions for example concerning directX could have probably been patched in at the time immediately following the release of a/the new OS we are far passed simple WDDM configurations and re-writes.

As time moves forward other components that use or rely on 3d engines and API calls to the OS are slowly changed and morph over time. Because of this feasibly being able to bend to the consumer and simply "patching it in" becomes less of a company choice and more of an impossibility.

I would wager my next paycheck that for example Windows 10s DirectX engine and supporting/core software could no longer at this point be "programmed" into Windows Vista for example.

While many do argue that some of these changes were again cosmetic on the surface at the time, they laid the framework for other options and features to be implemented and we simply cannot go back at this point.

I would also like to stress that while they are a software company I also do NOT think this has anything to do with corporate greed. Coding platforms and languages change overtime as a whole, OS and software are an ecosystem and im sure some members will take a tablespoon of salt when they realize that microsoft doesn't make the decisions all by itself. They rely on these languages like everyone else, and if a platform change meant that MS needed to change the way they implemented a feature or programmed a core file and it just happened to mean it broke backwards compatibility who is actually to blame at this point if the previous OS is too outdated to support the new language changes and feature set therefor baring Microsofts ability to code in that coveted "patch" users are crying for?

It just might be that maybe JUST maybe the software world isn't nearly a black and white as notepad leads you to believe?

 

[theFOoL]

WoW you guys are pointless LoL

From Xp to 10 MS could of made a Direct X Installer of the Latest Version they release to All OS's. How hard is that to do? I know Xp had 9.0C and Vista had 10.1 but come-on!

 

[Jetster]

WoW you guys are pointless LoL

From Xp to 10 MS could of made a Direct X Installer of the Latest Version they release to All OS's. How hard is that to do? I know Xp had 9.0C and Vista had 10.1 but come-on!

No, its not possible

 

[Solaris17]

WoW you guys are pointless LoL

From Xp to 10 MS could of made a Direct X Installer of the Latest Version they release to All OS's. How hard is that to do? I know Xp had 9.0C and Vista had 10.1 but come-on!

and you are pretty fucking clueless. Before combating the forum understand the scope of which you yourself are talking about. It pays to have even a basic understanding of how this works before disagreeing with someone. You should have stuck to your original plan of learning from the comments.

Sorry I get drastically unreasonable when people get argumentative with people that are trying to help them. I do not get paid to explain colors to blind people.

 

[alucasa]

Starting to think that this thread is rather pointless. I don't think OP is listening.

 

[theFOoL]

So your telling me that whatever Direct X Version they have on File is they put into whatever OS which was Xp at the time and they say "Ok now we release the next OS with a better Direct X Version" and what? we upgrade all the hardware? what if lots of people don't want that? What if they wanted to stay where there at? (Like my G'Pa)


edit: O wait it was 98SE that had 9.0C o...

 

[dorsetknob]

You want and Expect Microsoft to Re write the Code base of win XP /Vista /Win7 so they can run the latest ver of DirectX



And no doubt your expect win 95 / win 98 /win ME / win 2000 also to be re written for latest directX

Did You miss your meds this Morning

 

[Solaris17]

So your telling me that whatever Direct X Version they have on File is they put into whatever OS which was Xp at the time and they say "Ok now we release the next OS with a better Direct X Version" and what? we upgrade all the hardware? what if lots of people don't want that? What if they wanted to stay where there at? (Like my G'Pa)

Then you stay where you are and enjoy playing minecraft.

 

[silentbogo]

 

[theFOoL]

Yes i am listening and reading. This Thread can be closed. I understand MS made some Minor Updates to 9.0C/10.1 back then but i guess we'll see what happens with 12.1

 

[slozomby]

Well let's see...

-I have the last Version of Opera, Chrome and the Latest version of FireFox

I'm confused.
google stopped support xp as of jan1, no version since then . so it cant be the latest version of chrome
opera stopped supporting xp w/ v36. so its at least 1 version behind.
firefox is still supporting xp sp3 last I checked.

 

[eidairaman1]

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.

MS fixed all that with 7. Vista could be said to be like M.E.

8.0/8.1 had a bad UI scheme.

Course If MS had made DX12 a payable download I'd do it and Keep W7.

 

[theFOoL]

Yeah that would be cool but hey 10 is OK with me and surprisingly FF still supports Xp