6 replies to this topic

[Peter_NZ]

I have for some time wondered about the relationship between Direct X and the .NET Framework updates available through Autopatcher, and Vista. The questions are these:
1) Do I need to install Direct X 9.0C onto Vista? (either 32 or 64 bit)
I thought Vista had DX 10 as it's native DX install? If yes, won't putting DX 9C with it break it? Wouldn't 9C go over the top of 10?
2) Do I need any version of the .NET Framework prior to 3.0/3.5 on Vista? (either 32 or 64 bit)
For some time now, I've seen that APUP downloads older versions of .NET when retrieving updates. I've got into the habit of making an APUP folder specifically for the different OSes / Office (so that I have sep folders for XP 32-bit, XP 64-bit, Vista 32-bit, Vista 64-bit and then one for all versions of Office), but I put the "add ons" like Direct X and .NET and such generically into all the folders (as opposed to having a single folder just for them). Is Autopatcher smart enough to figure out which version of OS I'm installing onto and then show ONLY the relevant add-ons for that OS? I see that there is a noticeable difference in the stuff available under the Windows Addons section, but the Updated Components menu is very similar. In the past I've allowed Autopatcher to try installing pre 3.0 .NET Frameworks, but wondering if that is such a good idea having read somewhere that .NET starts @ 3 on Vista.

Cheers
Peter

[Cristiano]

well, extracting the content of the dx 9 update, you may find things like Mar2009_d3dx10_41_x86.cab that surely is an update to dx 10. so, this update doesn't break direct x 10, that comes with vista

for .net, you only will need the .net 3.5 sp1 and his updates. problem: vista comes with the old versions built-in. i'm unsure if those versions require updates

> I've seen that APUP downloads older versions of .NET when retrieving updates
yes, mostly, because the .net script aims for all windows scripts. so, if you are willing to update only vista, then you probably will have modules that never will load

> Is Autopatcher smart enough to figure out which version of OS I'm installing onto and then show ONLY the relevant add-ons for that OS?
if the module says that is aiming only xp, it will load only for xp. the same thing with updates for ie6. there's no point to show them if you are running ie7/8

> .NET starts @ 3 on Vista
true. but and the compatibility mode?

[]s

[_def_x_]

Quote

1) Do I need to install Direct X 9.0C onto Vista? (either 32 or 64 bit)
I thought Vista had DX 10 as it's native DX install? If yes, won't putting DX 9C with it break it? Wouldn't 9C go over the top of 10?

Wow, this is not an easy question because much of it depends on you, your system needs and hardware.

You didn't mention your video card, is it DirectX 10 compatible? You may only need 9.0c. Also, have you run the
tool to determine if Vista installed 10 by default?

(01) - Vista and DX10?
Yes, DirectX 10 was specifically designed for Vista.

(02) - DirectX 9.0c, Do you need it?
I don't know, do you use applications that require the 9.0c API that can't use the 10.0 API?
BTW, 10.1 is not backward compatible so any app that runs on 9.0c wont get any help from 10.1.

(03) - DirectX 9 / 10 - Can they co-exist?
This is the $100 question. I have read conflicting reports, some say installing 9 after 10 is fine, and others say files
get replaced therefor messing up both installs. My answer to you is find a reliable source who has done it or install
Vista in VPC 2007 and do your own definitive tests. You might find a reliable gaming site and ask this question.

Netizen, an AutoPatcher user is a Mod at a gaming site, you might try asking in one of their forums.
GATT 9.0

Mike

[Cristiano]

ops. i've forgot one thing: .net 3 comes with .net 2. so yes, the updates for .net 2 fits for an system that arrives with .net 3

> some say installing 9 after 10 is fine, and others say files get replaced therefor messing up both installs
well, that may have an easy explanation: some users run an tool that is designed to remove direct x from windows. and this, surely, breaks several things and install another version over it doesn't help a bit to solve those issues

besides, there's no any dx 10 redist. all the updates for direct x come in this package and, according to ms, it fits for all vista versions and something more

[]s

[Netizen]

Hey guys, I was out on study leave, now checking the forums again, and I came across this topic.

@Peter_NZ

Once you're using an unmodified install of Vista, you can install DirectX 9.0c without hassle. I've done it on several occasions without error. It has to do with some form of copy protection / annoyance present in recent games. They look for specific .dll files when loading, and if it's not present the game doesn't load. So to overcome that, you'll need to download and install the latest DirectX, which you can only do if you pass the "Validation" present at the download site (LINK)

So, in conclusion, once you're running genuine Windows, you can download and install the latest DirectX redistributable. Or you can just install the one you downloaded as part of your Autopatcher release


Netizen out.

[_def_x_]

@Netizen

Thanks for your input - much appreciated.

Mike

[Peter_NZ]

Thanks to Christiano, Mike & Netizen

So the short of it is that i'm ok to install .NET and DX as per the autopatcher.

@ Netizen

I have a DX10 card, but all my games are DX9 except MS FSX. Even then, I can't see any appreciable diff in game play when running FSX in DX10 mode, which is gay. A shame there is no way to "upsample" DX9 games to DX10 like when Blu-ray players upsample DVDs...