DX9 SDK VS 7+ only?

#1

I dunno I must be living in a cave, when the heck did MS drop support of older Visual C++ from their DirectX SDK? Ok I saw the when, it’s the December '04 update. But why the hell?

Has anyone tried to brute force linking the DX90.c libs in VC++ 6.0? I’m using 6.0 right now and obviously I must be using an older DX9 SDK because it works fine. If they’re just headers and libs in the SDK, what could they have possibly done to outcast every other compiler out there other than their Visual tools with the .Net suffix?

#2

Yes, the December update. Supposedly they added some security features, and that means dropping support for VS6 and Windows 98/ME. Some people will argue that Microsoft’s up to their old tricks again, forcing everybody to update, but XP is 4 years old already. VS6 is even older.

http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=288035

#3

Funny you should say that because one of the things I admire about Windows is backwards compatibility. I have stuff I made back in the Win 95/98 days (as well as other software) that still works in XP.

Now take MacOSX for example, not as pretty a picture. If anyone, I’d say Apple is even worst than MS at forcing people to update… and pay for those updates.

And just as many people would argue that there’s not much of a fundamental reason to upgrade to XP from Win2K (far cray from win 95/98/ME, I know).

#4

True true true, I agree with you. XP still runs my Borland C++ 3.1 just fine. Apps that are over 12 years old. I certainly don’t feel that way either, but if you read the DirectX newgroups too, well, that’s where I got that line from :P.

#5

Its a good thing C++ .NET 2003 only cost me £90…we programmers have it easy compared to these poor 3D package guys! :cool:

Despite improvements in .NET, I almost exploded when I found that when you try to find a function by name, you now have to scroll down a list to find the bloody thing! In VC++ 6.0, all you had to do was type in the begining of the function’s name and bam - it found yer function! God knows what games Microsoft are playing at…

…and if anyone replys with “Halo” or “Age of Empires” - I swear I will explode again!

#6

I don’t see that as a good thing. Take a £90 3D package, something cheap and simple like MilkShape, I’ll even go as far as saying GameSpace (Caligari) although I don’t think that one is £90 but you get the idea. Those cheapo 3D packages can still produce good graphics if in the hands of a capable artist.

VC++ .Net Standard on the other hand, is a waste of money. Ok sure, good for learning, but if I want to just learn I’ll go with a free compiler. At least the free ones are optimizing! VC++ .Net Std doesn’t optimize code apparently. If you compare this to my babble above about a cheapo software package in the hands of a good user, it’s not quite the same with programming. One would have to be pretty good at assembly to replace the optimizations a compiler would do, and even then we can’t do things like scheduling instructions, optimizing for cache sizes, etc. I’m reiterating reviews people post on Amazon.com :stuck_out_tongue: but just trying to get my point across. It’s obvious that MS is shifting their focus to a new dev platform (.Net) and new languages.

I hate the interface changes, it takes longer to load, simply behaves weird. Remember those stupid //}} delimters VC++ 6.0 used to help class wizard add code for you? They don’t do that anymore, great. But… class wizard is gone and whatever took its place does not know where to put code. I might as well type it all out by hand… and that’s when it defeats the point of having this kind of IDE.

#7

Man, i just purchased VC6.0 a year ago. Did not try the newest directx though, but i plan to still use VC6.0

#8

You can download the new Microsoft compiler for free and use it with Visual Studio 6.0 if you want. You don’t have to go out and buy the Visual Studio .NET IDE just to be able to compile/link against the latest DirectX SDK.

Get the Visual Studio .NET 2003 Professional C/C++ Optimizing Compiler and Linker here:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/vctoolkit2003/

–Chris

#9

Yes I know about the free .Net 2003 compiler. But someone had pointed out that the license agreement prohibits selling the binaries generated by that compiler. :frowning:

But yeah, it’s good for prototyping and testing real code to see how it’ll run if I had bought the full Visual Studio package (the standard VC++ .Net does not optimize).

#10

Boone: That feature is turned off by default in .Net, but can be activated.

Vertizor: If you wanted free, go open source. If you want to sell products based on other commerical products, one would expect that you might have to pay for the supplies.

Security vs. Backward Compatibility: I have yet to see a Mac get hit by a virus. On my PC laptop right now I have Adaware, MS Antispyware, Norton antivirus, Windows Firewall, and I’m connected through a VPN connection.

I hope I’ve made my point.

#11

I don’t mind paying for something I use because I have purchased VC++ 6 and the standard version of VC++ 7. What I don’t like, is that the only way to get an optimizing C++ compiler for commercial products, is to buy the whole $899 Visual Studio package that comes with VB.Net and VC#.Net, which I’m ultimately going to strip down to just VC++ 7 anyways.

And why are you bringing Mac and anti-virus into this discussion?

Ok I’ll bite. Myself, all I have is Mozilla, Proxomitron, and MailWasher. I had AVG running for a while but never needed it. Think I’m stupid and taking a risk not using an AV program? I haven’t had any problems in the last 5 years.

I own an iBook G4, use to own an iMac flat panel. It’s fun to use once in a while but it’s just difficult for me to un-brainwash myself and adapt to something new. And honestly, I’m kinda loathing Longhorn if/when it gets here. :argh:

#12

Since the latest version of DX9 is a dll are you are using the Visual C++ 6 compatible “d3dx9.lib” file? Check your Project Settings and change the “d3dx9dt.lib” to “d3dx9.lib”

Good Luck

#13

Re: Vertizor.

A waste of money? I wouldn’t say so, but if you are making Doom4 then I’m sure an optimiser is the better option… :rolleyes:

Re: Mummey.

It can be activated? :eek: Surely that is against the will of Bill Gates! :smiley:

#14

Why would Microsoft provide c++ for free and also sell it? Are the only difference is you can’t sell your programs compiled with the free compiler?

#15

I’m sorry but programmers have it harder than modellers, you can get loads of free educational modelling packages, where’s the educational versions of Visual Studio? I know there’s borland which has many upsides and downsides compared to VS but i’d still rather use VS down to the MSDN and numerious SDK supports. And for arguments sake i’d much rather piss around all day with verts making pretty models, then sit there all day kicking my machine and swearing at my monitor every i make an error in my code and have to spend about an hour trying to find the source of the problem.

And Screw DirectX what you using that piece of crap for? OpenGL much better SDK much better community in it; smoother rendering, easiler physics and a all round better 3D Development tool.

I learnt to program in OpenGL while i was learning C then onto C++, i swear by it.

#16

Re: MajesticMoose.

Well, I use DirectX for the simple reason I’ve been programming in it for the last three-four years! I’m sure OpenGL is fantastic, but I’m not changing apps for the sake of it…if it ain’t broke - don’t fix it!

As for paying out - I got .NET for £90. I get the package that is pretty much the industry standard and program in C++ without worry. Now lets look at the prices of Maya, XSI, LightWave and 3DS MAX…hmmm. This is going on the basis that I may want to sell my programs at end of it…without a watermark or copyright that prevents me from doing so.:wip:

As for programming being difficult - yes, it can be. But I actually found learning C/C++ easier than all these 3D packages! :argh:

May I ask how long you have been programming for? I don’t mean to ask in a “I bet he’s a damn rookie” mode, but I am seriously curious… :beer:

#17

I have sorta coding breakdown erm PHP coding 4 years (not sure if that counts), Java 2 years, Visual baisc… 2 and a half years, c around a year and a half and c++ 8-9 months ish.

Yes I am a bit of a n00bie i’m only 19

I have been making stat games until i hit OpenGL, now i just been trying to make a model rendering application, I played with DirectX n i cried, this is why i stick by openGL i know the member functions better n got a good understanding of the openGL matrix.

Been modelling in Maya for 2 years and Max for 3 months

oh btw seen your game is pretty cool ever so slightly hard

#18

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.