Originally Posted by lordikon
Yea, it turns out that Microsoft is a business. They make money selling products with new features, not giving you all of those new features for free. Windows 8 is $40, if you don't feel DX 11.1, WDDM 1.2, much better security, a faster OS, and a bunch of other features that you may or may not like is worth that $40, then don't pay for it.
I have two free copies of Windows 8 that I choose not to use. Windows 7 is better and easier to use (subjective to my opinion) It may be slightly faster under the hood but the UI slows down my pace.
And yeah, MS is in the business of making money. What with their new tablets, Their Xbox line. Their Skype ownership. Logitech ownership. They make money. But now, imagine if the fact that they hold back features from one OS just make another obsolete. The crap would hit the fan amongst the lesser, un-tech compatible users.
There are plenty of "selling points" for Windows 8, but this is just a slap to the face of loyal customers. If there is a valid reason that cannot be gotten around then I take back what I'm saying, but the chances are there isn't.
And as for the stupid money argument. I ahve two free copies of Windows 8. Yet, I've ploughed about £350 into Windows 7 on the PC's in my house. Why should I be left into the lurch after paying good money for Windows?
Originally Posted by Homeles
WDDM supported Vista (WDDM 1.0) because WDDM 1.1 was backwards compatible with WDDM 1.0. Is WDDM 1.2 backwards compatible with 1.1? You'd have to prove that it is. I can't find any information on it, and you're the one making the claim. Burden of proof is on you.
No, they're not correctly calling bullcrap. You, and everyone else, are whining because you feel like you're entitled to an update. Newsflash: we live in a capitalist society. You are expected to pay for goods and services. If you want things to work differently, you need to change the world's economic system.
For your argument to have any substance, you'd need to prove that the changes Windows 8 brings are less than or equal to the changes that Windows 7 made to Vista. You'd also have to prove that the changes in Windows 8 don't cause any more trouble for graphics handling than the changes Windows 7 brought. Good luck with that.
No, the burden of proof is not on me. It was a rhetorical question in response to this gravity being a theory post. The idea is the comparison sucks because you can at least show gravity.
And WDDM 1.1 was implemented onto Vista and made to bge backwards compatible for that reason. Otherwise, it wouldn't have been made so.