4 ms·

If that was true then WPF and WinForms would have been part of .NET Core. If that was true then Microsoft wouldn't be pushing DirectX 12.

Const-me 9y ago
> WPF and WinForms would have been part of .NET Core I’d love them to be, but unfortunately there’re technical reasons for that. Both depend on too many Windows components. WinForms is really a thin wrapper around Win32 windows and GDI+. WPF relies heavily on DirectX 9. For mobile platforms, Microsoft offers Xamarin for GUI. > Microsoft wouldn't be pushing DirectX 12. Again, there’re technical reasons. For the same reasons Apple is pushing Metal, and Khronos is pushing Vulkan, all 3 are conceptually quite similar.
- dvfjsdhgfv 9y ago
  > Again, there’re technical reasons. That's interesting. For one, MS has a long history of using DirectX to force people to buy the next version of Windows. Second, DirectX 12 seems to deliver uneven results when benchmarked against DirectX 11. Some go even as far as say it's just plain worse than the previous version. Nevertheless, MS will do what they can to make people switch to Windows 10, no matter what people really want, and what their personal and business needs are.
  - Const-me 9y ago
    > DirectX 12 seems to deliver uneven results when benchmarked against DirectX 11. Same applies to Vulkan. https://www.anandtech.com/show/10047/quick-look-vulkan-performance-on-the-talos-principle https://www.anandtech.com/show/10047/quick-look-vulkan-perfo... https://www.pcgamer.com/doom-benchmarks-return-vulkan-vs-opengl/2/ https://www.pcgamer.com/doom-benchmarks-return-vulkan-vs-ope... And that’s understandable. If you’ll just port a DirectX 11 game engine to 12 (or an OpenGL game engine to Vulkan), without drastic redesign of renderer, you’ll unlikely gain huge performance improvement, if any at all, compared to the older technology. The renderer need to be designed quite differently to benefit from these new multithreading focused low overhead GPU APIs, be in VK, DX12 or Metal.
    - dvfjsdhgfv 9y ago
      Except that it shouldn't be related to Windows 10 at all. MS did the same with DirectX10, forcing people to change their systems to Vista (for some reason they call it an "upgrade"). Eventually it turned out DirectX 10 actually can be run on Windows XP and it was just a ruse on the part of Microsoft to make people buy Vista.
      - Const-me 9y ago
        > it shouldn't be related to Windows 10 at all Let’s compare with Vulkan on Linux, I hope we all agree Microsoft has nothing to do about them. Intel Vulcan drivers for Linux require at least kernel 3.10, released in 2013. nVidia Vulkan driver requires Linux kernel version 3.13+. Should Vulkan support be related to Linux kernel version? Probably not, but it still is. > forcing people to change their systems to Vista They haven’t forces too many, Vista never surpassed XP (1). And around 2009, average installed RAM amount exceeded 2GB (2), I think more people upgraded the OS because of the 64 bits. I know about XP 64, but the software & driver support just wasn’t there. (1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Operatingsystem_market_share.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Operatingsystem_market_sh... (2) https://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2016/10/05/average-pc-memory-ram-continues-climb/ https://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2016/10/05/average-pc-memory-...
        Nullabillity 9y ago
        Linux kernel upgrades are free, has an iron policy on userland regressions, and aren't bundled with malware. That's a pretty big difference with requiring Windows "upgrades".
        Const-me 9y ago
        > Linux kernel upgrades are free Windows 10 upgrade was also free for a couple of years. > has an iron policy on userland regressions GPU drivers include a lot of code running in the kernel. And Linux doesn’t give a damn about broken device drivers, especially third-party binary drivers, like GPU ones. > aren't bundled with malware Windows kernel is not bundled either. And Linux userland sometimes is, e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4558049 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4558049
- Nullabillity 9y ago
  > I’d love them to be, but unfortunately there’re technical reasons for that. Both depend on too many Windows components. WinForms is really a thin wrapper around Win32 windows and GDI+. WPF relies heavily on DirectX 9. And yet somehow Mono is able to (mostly) emulate WinForms, while Wine can (mostly) emulate D3D9. And MS can't (at least) throw their weight behind that, rather than wasting time on WSL? > Again, there’re technical reasons. For the same reasons Apple is pushing Metal, and Khronos is pushing Vulkan, all 3 are conceptually quite similar. So why aren't Microsoft (and Apple) pushing Vulkan as well, rather than their own "quite similar" APIs?
  - Const-me 9y ago
    > MS can't (at least) throw their weight behind that, rather than wasting time on WSL? I don’t know the answer to that, I’m unrelated to MS, not even on the same continent. But I have an idea why. Because outside Android, Linux GPU stack is a mess. Maybe Vulkan will fix it, but it’s not happened yet. I’m just not sure it’s possible to build a good product on top of that. But they sure can build a single cross-platform GUI library for Windows, OSX, and mobile platforms. And I hope they will. > why aren't Microsoft (and Apple) pushing Vulkan as well, rather than their own "quite similar" APIs? Apple released Metal in 2014. MS released DX12 in 2015. Vulkan was first announced in 2015, and they released 1.0 version of the spec only in 2016. That’s why.

Const-me 9y ago

> WPF and WinForms would have been part of .NET Core I’d love them to be, but unfortunately there’re technical reasons for that. Both depend on too many Windows components. WinForms is really a thin wrapper around Win32 windows and GDI+. WPF relies heavily on DirectX 9. For mobile platforms, Microsoft offers Xamarin for GUI. > Microsoft wouldn't be pushing DirectX 12. Again, there’re technical reasons. For the same reasons Apple is pushing Metal, and Khronos is pushing Vulkan, all 3 are conceptually quite similar.

dvfjsdhgfv 9y ago
> Again, there’re technical reasons. That's interesting. For one, MS has a long history of using DirectX to force people to buy the next version of Windows. Second, DirectX 12 seems to deliver uneven results when benchmarked against DirectX 11. Some go even as far as say it's just plain worse than the previous version. Nevertheless, MS will do what they can to make people switch to Windows 10, no matter what people really want, and what their personal and business needs are.
- Const-me 9y ago
  > DirectX 12 seems to deliver uneven results when benchmarked against DirectX 11. Same applies to Vulkan. https://www.anandtech.com/show/10047/quick-look-vulkan-performance-on-the-talos-principle https://www.anandtech.com/show/10047/quick-look-vulkan-perfo... https://www.pcgamer.com/doom-benchmarks-return-vulkan-vs-opengl/2/ https://www.pcgamer.com/doom-benchmarks-return-vulkan-vs-ope... And that’s understandable. If you’ll just port a DirectX 11 game engine to 12 (or an OpenGL game engine to Vulkan), without drastic redesign of renderer, you’ll unlikely gain huge performance improvement, if any at all, compared to the older technology. The renderer need to be designed quite differently to benefit from these new multithreading focused low overhead GPU APIs, be in VK, DX12 or Metal.
  - dvfjsdhgfv 9y ago
    Except that it shouldn't be related to Windows 10 at all. MS did the same with DirectX10, forcing people to change their systems to Vista (for some reason they call it an "upgrade"). Eventually it turned out DirectX 10 actually can be run on Windows XP and it was just a ruse on the part of Microsoft to make people buy Vista.
    - Const-me 9y ago
      > it shouldn't be related to Windows 10 at all Let’s compare with Vulkan on Linux, I hope we all agree Microsoft has nothing to do about them. Intel Vulcan drivers for Linux require at least kernel 3.10, released in 2013. nVidia Vulkan driver requires Linux kernel version 3.13+. Should Vulkan support be related to Linux kernel version? Probably not, but it still is. > forcing people to change their systems to Vista They haven’t forces too many, Vista never surpassed XP (1). And around 2009, average installed RAM amount exceeded 2GB (2), I think more people upgraded the OS because of the 64 bits. I know about XP 64, but the software & driver support just wasn’t there. (1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Operatingsystem_market_share.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Operatingsystem_market_sh... (2) https://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2016/10/05/average-pc-memory-ram-continues-climb/ https://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2016/10/05/average-pc-memory-...
      - Nullabillity 9y ago
        Linux kernel upgrades are free, has an iron policy on userland regressions, and aren't bundled with malware. That's a pretty big difference with requiring Windows "upgrades".
        Const-me 9y ago
        > Linux kernel upgrades are free Windows 10 upgrade was also free for a couple of years. > has an iron policy on userland regressions GPU drivers include a lot of code running in the kernel. And Linux doesn’t give a damn about broken device drivers, especially third-party binary drivers, like GPU ones. > aren't bundled with malware Windows kernel is not bundled either. And Linux userland sometimes is, e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4558049 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4558049
Nullabillity 9y ago
> I’d love them to be, but unfortunately there’re technical reasons for that. Both depend on too many Windows components. WinForms is really a thin wrapper around Win32 windows and GDI+. WPF relies heavily on DirectX 9. And yet somehow Mono is able to (mostly) emulate WinForms, while Wine can (mostly) emulate D3D9. And MS can't (at least) throw their weight behind that, rather than wasting time on WSL? > Again, there’re technical reasons. For the same reasons Apple is pushing Metal, and Khronos is pushing Vulkan, all 3 are conceptually quite similar. So why aren't Microsoft (and Apple) pushing Vulkan as well, rather than their own "quite similar" APIs?
- Const-me 9y ago
  > MS can't (at least) throw their weight behind that, rather than wasting time on WSL? I don’t know the answer to that, I’m unrelated to MS, not even on the same continent. But I have an idea why. Because outside Android, Linux GPU stack is a mess. Maybe Vulkan will fix it, but it’s not happened yet. I’m just not sure it’s possible to build a good product on top of that. But they sure can build a single cross-platform GUI library for Windows, OSX, and mobile platforms. And I hope they will. > why aren't Microsoft (and Apple) pushing Vulkan as well, rather than their own "quite similar" APIs? Apple released Metal in 2014. MS released DX12 in 2015. Vulkan was first announced in 2015, and they released 1.0 version of the spec only in 2016. That’s why.