   DirectX 10 ....... (I love it)
  i was expecting Microsoft to put More samples for the MDX  in directX 10 but on the contrary they put nothing  instead of encouraging us to use MDX the r going to make us Dump it and change to c++ , there is no advanced samples and the Documentation sucks , and now u can't use directx10 unless u upgrade to window Vista heh bullshit i hate c++ but i am now forced to work using it , can anyone advice me with any beginner tutorials ?[Edited by - jad_salloum on December 15, 2005 7:39:57 AM]
  I think if someone 'hates' C++ then they havn't used it enough and gave up at the first hurdle. There is no point in an uneducating slating of the language. You will more than likely have to learn it now to get anywhere.Look on For Beginners for the tutorial.Dave   ;Quote:can anyone advice me with any beginner tutorials ?Right now Direct3D10 is only unmanaged. You might find people coding Managed Wrappers for it but even with that said, I am sure Mr. Tom Miller and his team are working on getting the Managed Direct3D10 assemblies in place. Coming back to the original post. Direct3D10 is an excellent step up from Direct3D9 and you will love it once you see the benefit it brings to the table. Forcing people to upgrade to Vista is a harsh way of looking at things, but I guess that's technically correct.Also Microsoft isn't forcing us to use native Direct3D. They merely released a Direct3D10 Technical preview so that us enthusiasts may have a look at it. Coding is coding and be it c++, C#, java and or any other programming language. For now i'd be happy to play with Direct3D10 on any operating system with any programming language. It looks really cool and from what i've heard is even better if you working with it.I really hope you change your mind about the scenarion and if you have any questions please mail directx@microsoft.com for any questions regarding DirectX. I will find out for you when and how the MDX assemblies for Direct3D10 will appear cause I am sure they will.Take care.   ;Quote:Right now Direct3D10 is only unmanaged. You might find people coding Managed Wrappers for it but even with that said, I am sure Mr. Tom Miller and his team are working on getting the Managed Direct3D10 assemblies in place. Coming back to the original post. Direct3D10 is an excellent step up from Direct3D9 and you will love it once you see the benefit it brings to the table. Forcing people to upgrade to Vista is a harsh way of looking at things, but I guess that's technically correct.Right. Since it's only a community preview and not even a release candidate beta, it wouldn't make sense to waste the time writing managed wrappers on such a volatile API. If they do this once, they'll have to keep it up every two months, taking precious time away from current MDX efforts.I agree with you that MDX could use a little more attention though, regarding samples and documentation. It does make you wonder where they want to go with MDX, but in the video demo of Sparkle for example (that's a flash-y tool for creating UI's, pun intended), they worked with C# on 3D scenes, so I think MDX is a solid part of Microsoft's .NET roadmap to the future.Still, it wouldn't hurt to hear this from the horse's mouth too occasionally!!Anyway, Windows XP will officially turn 'unsupported' as the primary OEM operating system in December next year, at which point hardware vendors will be switching to Vista. Until then, you don't need to worry about it much and even then, it will take some time before Vista becomes mainstream. And even with Vista as mainstream OS, you can probably use DirectX9(.L) for years.For some excellent tutorials, you might want to take a look at Armadon's site (see above).   ;Quote:they worked with C# on 3D scenesThat'd probably be using the Avalon 3D stuff and I don't know how they've implemented it, it could be using unmanaged DX.Anyway it doesn't really matter, MS want .Net to be the future so I don't think they're gonna neglect MDX.  However the fact of the matter is that the majority of games currently use unmanaged code and that's probably not going to change for a while so it's not surprising MS seem to pay more attention to the unmanaged DX API.  I'm sure there will be a managed version of the DX API available by the time it's actually released, as remigius it's a preview, not the final product hence you can expect things to change between now and the actual release.   ;  For starters, it's not "DirectX 10." It's "Direct3D 10." The other components are not version 10 yet.You clearly don't understand the concept of a 'technology preview.' Of course it doesn't contain any advanced samples or decent documentation, of course there's no managed wrapper yet. That's because it's not finished yet. It's not due for a proper release until sometime next year, I believe. MS have opted to give us a sneak peek at what they're working on, and you're trying to shit all over them for it. Nice job.   ;Quote:Original post by superpigYou clearly don't understand the concept of a 'technology preview.' Of course it doesn't contain any advanced samples or decent documentation, of course there's no managed wrapper yet. That's because it's not finished yet. It's not due for a proper release until sometime next year, I believe. MS have opted to give us a sneak peek at what they're working on, and you're trying to shit all over them for it. Nice job.can u look at the last 3 SDK's and  tell me what have been changed in MDX samples ?? well, nothing changed  they r the same since juneSDK  and maybe before . what will cost them to convert 1 of the c++ samples to C# every SDK at least skinned mesh sample  or the ConfigSystem Sample in OctoberSDK and lots more .... how MDX is going to compet with UMDX if it has no advanced samples and resources   ;  sry, but I don´t understand what this flame post is supposed to be? Do you go to a bakery and shout at them because the dough looks untasty? Or why there aren´t chocolate flakes on it yet? I hope not, so why flame about Direct 3D 10 being badly documented whilst it is far away from being released? Stating you hate C++ won´t help at all. Microsoft isn´t making you dump MDX, managed D3D10 is just not done yet.Please note I have not done anything with D3D10 yet and have yet to see it in person, but from what I´ve heard and what code snippets I´ve seen "DirectX 10 sucks" is far off.   ;  :) if the title bothers u i will change it no prob  and who told u thet i am shouting :):) i am sooo calm:):);Quote:Original post by jad_salloumcan u look at the last 3 SDK's and  tell me what have been changed in MDX samples ?? well, nothing changed  they r the same since juneSDK  and maybe before . what will cost them to convert 1 of the c++ samples to C# every SDK at least skinned mesh sample  or the ConfigSystem Sample in OctoberSDK and lots more .... how MDX is going to compet with UMDX if it has no advanced samples and resourcesThis is strictly my own personal view... but the MDX vs DX is a bit of a "chicken and egg" situation.DirectX is, and will continue to be, a professional platform - many people on these forums (as well as the much wider games industry) base their product in part on the API and it's those products that pay their wages. So, DirectX will be targetted at those who are relying on it as a professional tool - and traditionally this is native/C++ programmers.At a complete guess, I'd say 90-95% of professional DirectX applications will be written in C/C++. Therefore it makes sense for the powers-that-be in WGGT to balance funding/resources/manpower at the components of the tool that are going to be of benefit to the most number of people.So, the chicken and egg reference... more MDX developers means more resources, but you won't get more developers without more resources..Net and MDX are still relatively new platforms - I'm sure it'll get better in time [smile]Jack   