Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Graphics

DX11 Tested Against DX9 With Dirt 2 Demo 201

MojoKid writes "The PC demo for Codemasters' upcoming DirectX 11 racing title, Dirt 2, has just hit the web and is available for download. Dirt 2 is a highly-anticipated racing sim that also happens to feature leading-edge graphic effects. In addition to a DirectX 9 code path, Dirt 2 also utilizes a number of DirectX 11 features, like hardware-tessellated dynamic water, an animated crowd and dynamic cloth effects, in addition to DirectCompute 11-accelerated high-definition ambient occlusion (HADO), full floating-point high dynamic range (HDR) lighting, and full-screen resolution post processing. Performance-wise, DX11 didn't take its toll as much as you'd expect this early on in its adoption cycle." Bit-tech also took a look at the graphical differences, arriving at this conclusion: "You'd need a seriously keen eye and brown paper envelope full of cash from one of the creators of Dirt 2 to notice any real difference between textures in the two versions of DirectX."

Comment Re:you are off (Score 1) 759

XP is not the latest software, it is simply the most popular. Even if the majority of people in the world preferred the original VW Beetle from the 30s (or whenever it started production, I think it was in production for something crazy like 50 years), it doesn't mean that VW are still obliged to find and fix design flaws in it.

Sure, they are not required to. But there are a lot of third party manufacturers that would produce replacement parts, sometimes even better parts than the originals if there was a demand for it. This is simply not an option for Win XP no matter how high the demand is.

This should not be news to anyone making themselves dependent on Microsoft products, but lots of companies are doing it anyway. Guess it would be a bit different if the market was not monopolized.

Comment Re:Squids (Score 1) 803

If a civilization is advanced enough to travel here, they're probably advanced enough to not have any good reason to be hostile.

And we who are the equivalent of amoebas compared to them would know that how?

We can't just assume that advanced civilizations will be nice just because we want it to be like that, there is simply too many unknown factors for us to assume anything. They could just as well have the attitude that there's another little developing planet, blast them quickly before they too invent the Xyz rays and can start to compete with us

Comment Re:Oh come on (Score 1) 98

The default bootup option should of course be your dummy OS that is passwordless with no personal information in it and a backup job to transmit photos, keylogs etc. to your server.

Protects your real data from getting wiped by tech-challenged thiefs and will also help you getting your laptop back if stolen.

Comment Re:It really looks like the prosecution will fail (Score 1) 347

If the prosecution fails the next step will be even heavier lobbying against politicians, "look what they are doing and they are getting away with it".

There are a few legal changes related to IP law and the operators resposibilities coming up for discussion in the swedish parliament soon. A failed prosecution would likely be used to point out how unfair the content owners are being treated in Sweden compared to other countries.

Comment Re:PDF isn't a proprietary format (Score 1) 198

It is open. The reason why Adobe threatened to sue Microsoft seems to be that they would use their monopoly situation to force a certain Adobe product line out of business by offering the "save as PDF" in Office.

Believe it or not, but a lot of companies actually pay money for propriety software used only to convert their documents to PDF format. The lawsuit threat proves it.

The monopoly situation is what allows them to sue. If everyone was using OpenOffice I suppose they could sue Sun(?) for making Adobes business idea irrelevant unless Sun removed the PDF conversion.

So Microsoft actually wanted to do something good and implement an open standard, even if it was probably not out of love for open standards in general. They were stopped by anti-monopoly laws that should be a good idea since monopolies are bad, but which in this case is used to sustain Adobes sales of the same function a few more years just because the customers they would otherwise loose doesn't realize they could get the same thing for free. Their terms for letting Microsoft include the function was that they should charge extra for it and let Adobe in on the revenue. Adobe is just after the money whether it comes from their own products or from getting a piece of the monopoly.

You may consider it good or bad, but the fact is that monopoly regulations doesn't let the market leader compete on even terms featurewise with other products when it comes to functionality that can be seen as a separate business niche.

Now I am sure that Adobes package does a lot more than just convert other documents to PDF and some customers actually need that extra functionality, but Adobe still considers the conversion alone important enough for their business model to go to court over so that alone is the important feature here.

Comment Re:Eh, kinda (Score 1) 308

The geeks have already installed Firefox on their grandmoms computers and giving the geeks another non-IE option to install would not really help decrease the IE marketshare. So it would make sense for Google to primarily try and reach the remaining IE users by other means than the geek install squad.

Making it the default browser with OEM sales would really be the killing blow. I am not sure what it takes to do that, but can imagine Google having both the means and the motivation.

Slashdot Top Deals

For God's sake, stop researching for a while and begin to think!

Working...