Harrisson :
@gomerpile, there is no real reason for XP not to have DX10, the only one is why Vista is required - MS wants to sell more of new OS, simple as that. Ofc to do so MS artificialy made some limits so you couldnt just copy DX10 program files to XP, but its only because they choose to make obstructions, not because DX10 isnt feasable on XP at all.
I've done some thinking on all this and I think part of the reason M$ tied DX10 into Vista was that M$ had tried to get people to move into 64 bit computing before with XP64 Pro and people didn't respond, as well as the various software and hardware companies ignoring XP64 Pro. Similar things have happened to other companies in the past when they made a new OS that would run software from a previous OS.
Back when Commodore (anyone remember using one of those?) made the Commodore 128, they made it backward compatible with the Commodore 64. The idea was to make an easy transition from an old computer to the new one. But the software companies figured there was no reason for them to write to the new C128 OS, since they could keep writing to the C64 OS and both computers would run it. Similar thing happened to Apple with the Apple II GS.
So M$ made the XP64 Pro OS and very few companies bothered to support it. So the solution? Tie DX10 to a new OS and force both the software and hardware companies to produce 64 bit stuff. Sure, there is Vista 32 available and that may be a mistake on M$'s part. Don't know for sure. But Vista 32 can't really use 4 gig or more of ram, so people will end up having to get Vista 64 sooner or later anyway.
Could DX10 be hacked into XP and XP64? People have been trying for the past year without real success. In my opinion, it won't be possible. Could be wrong, but its my present opinion. I don't object to getting a new OS. After all, I've gone from Win 3.1 to Win95, to Win98 to XP to XP 64. Most of the OS's in the past have changed every three years or so. That's called progress. My only real objection with Vista is that it has so many problem areas, bugs, etc. It reminds me all too well on WinME. But if tying DX10 to Vista is the only way to move people away from 32 bit computing and into 64 bit computing, then I accept it. Grudgingly, but I accept it. I do wish DX10 could have been made to work with XP64, though.