Have Microsoft brought out a managed version of the latest DirectX 10 release (March 2009) or do they only do that once it's finalised?

TIA.

Managed DX is basically dead. Use either native DX or the XNA Framework (or something like SlimDX).

Jim Perry:

Use either native DX or the XNA Framework (or something like SlimDX).

It is an interesting advice to use the XNA FX when the OP asks for D3D10 support. Also, link to SlimDX, which could very well be the most complete managed D3D10 solution :)

Bjoern Graf:

It is an interesting advice to use the XNA FX when the OP asks for D3D10 support.

He didn't specifically ask for D3D10 support, he just asked if MDX 10 existed.

Jim Perry:

He didn't specifically ask for D3D10 support, he just asked if MDX 10 existed.

With DX10 being D3D10 only, it can be considered a safe assumption (as safe as these things can go, though) that asking for MDX 10 means a managed interface for D3D10. The fact that MDX 1 and 2 Beta cover(ed) DX9 only makes the afore mentioned assumption even more likely :)

exactly.  MDX10 is clearly an ask for D3D10 support in the managed space.

its a pity that great support for the managed platform by DX is not forthcoming from MS. soon there will be both D3D10 and D3D11 that are uncovered as well as D3D9 managed being in "deprecated mode". I talk about my opinion on this in the comments on http://www.futuregpu.org/2008/11/code-samples-coming-soon.html?showComment=1227817140000

PhilTaylor:

its a pity that great support for the managed platform by DX is not forthcoming from MS.

While that is very true SlimDX fills that gap quite nicely; I might even be inclined to say it is better than MS everything could do (apart from being part of Windows) :)

I agree - Promit (and others) has done a fine job.. Even when MS did make MDX they didn't cover all the APIs as well as SlimDX does.

OK OK. I didn't mean to start a fight guys. :)

Would I be correct in saying then, that XNA is not the ideal platform to use for general 3D applications. Have MS given up on the idea of a managed API for DirectX and if so how does SlimDX stack up?

klempie:

Would I be correct in saying then, that XNA is not the ideal platform to use for general 3D applications. Have MS given up on the idea of a managed API for DirectX and if so how does SlimDX stack up?

I would say that is incorrect. Even though the XNA managed framwork API is promoted as a game development tool, the API is general enough to use for generally any 3D application. I'm using it at work for visualizing business data. The XNA API beats the crap out of the WPF API for simplicity and low-level rendering power. See the WinForms series sample on this website.

klempie:

OK OK. I didn't mean to start a fight guys. :)

We do not fight :)

klempie:

Would I be correct in saying then, that XNA is not the ideal platform to use for general 3D applications. [...] how does SlimDX stack up?

Additional to Craigs answer: SlimDX is "only" a wrapper around the native APIs, giving you to the metal access to these APIs. What you use is up to your preferences and requirements, e.g. you won'T get very far with the XNA FX when you want to use the latest D3D version :)

Bjoern Graf:

Additional to Craigs answer: SlimDX is "only" a wrapper around the native APIs, giving you to the metal access to these APIs. What you use is up to your preferences and requirements, e.g. you won'T get very far with the XNA FX when you want to use the latest D3D version :)

Well, I want to stay as close to the unmanaged code as possible so yes, a wrapper is what I am looking for. Is the SlimDX DirectX 10 wrapper complete?

klempie:

Well, I want to stay as close to the unmanaged code as possible

You want to program in managed code but stay as close to unmanaged code as possible? That doesn't make sense. The XNA framework is created and supported by Microsoft, SlimDX is not, I know which I would prefer to hedge my bets with.

You could argue MS abandoned Managed DirectX so they could also abandon the XNA managed framework but I think the situation is different and it is less likely.

klempie:

Is the SlimDX DirectX 10 wrapper complete?

Yes, and D3D10.1 completness will be reached in the next release IIRC.

Craig Martin:

That doesn't make sense. The XNA framework is created and supported by Microsoft, SlimDX is not, I know which I would prefer to hedge my bets with.

That's the common problem with, no, more like an ignorance of open source in MS land: people just assume that something build by MS will stay and will be better supported while other offers will go down eventually, even if that eventuality is way ahead in the future. Just look at MDX: It was down by a single person, support was suboptimal (albeit good for a single person project) and eventually dropped in favor of a focus switch. Placing your bets on something only because it is from MS seems rather shortsighted.

Craig Martin:

You could argue MS abandoned Managed DirectX so they could also abandon the XNA managed framework but I think the situation is different and it is less likely.

And how is SlimDX more likely to be discontinued? And in the unlikely case of that it is open source so it could - and probably will - be picked up by someone else. This would be impossible for most MS frameworks (just see MDX). And the XNA FX does not offer support in any way for new Windows technologies (e.g. D3D10+, D2D and DW) and up to this date there is no word if MS will ever release any managed wrappers around these new technologies. As great as the .NET platform is its support for newer Windows features is lacking, if not disappointing. Locking yourself into MS supported platform support and ignoring the offers of 3rd parties seems to be a suboptimal business decision, esp. as MS' strongest advantage it its creation of an ecosystem and empowering 3rd parties to build on top of it.

klempie:

Well, I want to stay as close to the unmanaged code as possible so yes, a wrapper is what I am looking for.

Maybe it's because I don't know the complete story on what you're doing, but it seems you're picking the latest technology to use instead of picking the technology that's best suited to what you want to do (which isn't necessarily the latest and greatest thing).

Bjoern Graf:

That's the common problem with, no, more like an ignorance of open source in MS land

It's not about open source or MS land at all, but my post was a mistake, as JP points out; choose the technology that best suits your project, in the OP's case SlimDX may be the better choice, they will never know unless they appraise both technologies.

Also you misquoted me. The first sentence in that quote is not related to the second sentence.

Craig Martin:

You want to program in managed code but stay as close to unmanaged code as possible? That doesn't make sense.

XNA provides a managed functional abstraction of DirectX correct? In other words, by assumption, wouldn't that mean that the DirectX API has been repackaged to make typical game functionality easily accessible to game developers hiding the low details of DirectX API programming?

Jim Perry:

Maybe it's because I don't know the complete story on what you're doing, but it seems you're picking the latest technology to use instead of picking the technology that's best suited to what you want to do (which isn't necessarily the latest and greatest thing).

Hi Jim.

Yeh the project is a bit complicated. Some of the functionality of the application also requires video capture and by all accounts MS is in the process of deprecating DirectShow (apparently after Win 7 it will be gone, or so I've read) in favour of Media Foundation. Curiously they are only introducing capture in Media Foundation in Win 7 which I think is completely laughable; releasing a media API without video capture that is. So we've decided for new apps we're going to take the business risk and develop for Win 7 (I'm developing on the beta). Having taken the leap on Media Foundation we just figured we'd go the same route with DirectX 10 as well since our app will only work from Win 7 on anyway.

klempie:

Craig Martin:

You want to program in managed code but stay as close to unmanaged code as possible? That doesn't make sense.

XNA provides a managed functional abstraction of DirectX correct? In other words, by assumption, wouldn't that mean that the DirectX API has been repackaged to make typical game functionality easily accessible to game developers hiding the low details of DirectX API programming?

XNA does provide a managed functional abstraction of DirectX, But as I said previously I think it is currently general enough to use for any 3D app. Apart from the Game class (which you don't have to use) I can't think of a single type in the framework that is specific to game development or designed to make only game development easier.

What I said above that you quoted wasn't about XNA specifically, it was just meant to say that programming in managed code can be different to programming in unmanaged code.

Craig Martin:

What I said above that you quoted wasn't about XNA specifically, it was just meant to say that programming in managed code can be different to programming in unmanaged code.

Yeh I know that. What I was getting at is that I like dealing with the nuts and bolts of a system but I wanted the security of managed code to catch any *** ups I might make hence "I want to stay as close to the unmanaged code as possible". What I am getting at is, if XNA is a functional abstraction level above DirectX then it will not have the same interface. Managed DirectX (and I am assuming the same goes for SlimDX) is on the same functional level as native DirectX (more or less) and therefore one would imagine it has managed function calls and data structure equivalents of DirectX. Does it make sense now?

No offense but I found your response to be quite condescending and unwarranted.

Ok I apologise for that klempie. Have a play with the XNA framework anyway it's pretty good ;)

Craig Martin:

Ok I apologise for that klempie. Have a play with the XNA framework anyway it's pretty good ;)

Unfortunately no time :(. I have already read through all the MSDN documentation on DirectX10 so my hours attributable to research are all used up so I will either be going with unmanaged DirectX or SlimDX but I am not too keen on going outside MS. To be honest, I love the power of C++ so I'm not tooooo worried about going unmanaged. Just a little anxious. :p

Anyway, thanks for your help bud.

Craig Martin:

klempie:

Would I be correct in saying then, that XNA is not the ideal platform to use for general 3D applications. Have MS given up on the idea of a managed API for DirectX and if so how does SlimDX stack up?

I would say that is incorrect. Even though the XNA managed framwork API is promoted as a game development tool, the API is general enough to use for generally any 3D application. I'm using it at work for visualizing business data. The XNA API beats the crap out of the WPF API for simplicity and low-level rendering power. See the WinForms series sample on this website.

I'm not sure I agree with that. From what I've seen it was some time before some people finally figured out ways to get XNA working in Winforms environment because the API was not designed with that in mind. If an API is not designed as a general API to the point where people other than the API developers have to document and show users how to use it under Winforms, then I find it hard to view it as a general 3D application API.

As others have mentioned here, SlimDX is probably the better choice for that role, and you aren't limited to DirectX 9.1c either :)

Jim Perry:

klempie:

Well, I want to stay as close to the unmanaged code as possible so yes, a wrapper is what I am looking for.

Maybe it's because I don't know the complete story on what you're doing, but it seems you're picking the latest technology to use instead of picking the technology that's best suited to what you want to do (which isn't necessarily the latest and greatest thing).

Wise words indeed and well worth heeding :)