Technology as a way of life

I guess many of you are google-ing all day for tweaks to bring DirectX 10 on XP and are not sure what to do considering the massive contradictory information. The interesting thing is some russian site made an alpha "patch" to add the functionality to XP. But does it actually work?
After downloading the patch, i installed it on a virtual machine to see if it will even boot afterwards.
Well, to my surprise it did boot normal and the DirectX Diagnostic Tool (dxdiag.exe) "confirmed" it's installed. This would be enough proof for the majority of the people but not for a geek like me. That little "change" is easily done by modifing a file and a bit of registry tweaking. So that still doesn't convince me. The patch could actually work with the SDK's (Software Development Kit) DirectX 10 only and not suitable for games. It makes the system think you have Dx10 but no actual use can be achieved (the extra features are not enabled in anything).

Microsoft did annnounce there is no compatibility between XP and Dx10 because of changes in the Windows Display Driver Model (WDDM) and the new audio driver stack plus other updates in the operating system.

Will DirectX 10 be available for Windows XP?

No. Windows Vista, which has DirectX 10, includes an updated DirectX runtime based on the runtime in Windows XP SP2 (DirectX 9.0c) with changes to work with the new Windows Display Driver Model (WDDM) and the new audio driver stack, and with other updates in the operating system. In addition to Direct3D 9, Windows Vista supports two new interfaces when the correct video hardware and drivers are present: Direct3D9Ex and Direct3D10."

Since these new interfaces rely on the WDDM technology, they will never be available on earlier versions of Windows. All the other changes made to DirectX technologies for Windows Vista are also specific to the new version of Windows. The name DirectX 10 is misleading in that many technologies shipping in the DirectX SDK (XACT, XINPUT, D3DX) are not encompassed by this version number. So, referring to the version number of the DirectX runtime as a whole has lost much of its meaning, even for 9.0c. The DirectX Diagnostic Tool (DXdiag.exe) on Windows Vista does report DirectX 10, but this really only refers to Direct3D 10.

Since these new interfaces rely on the WDDM technology, they will never be available on earlier versions of Windows. All the other changes made to DirectX technologies for Windows Vista are also specific to the new version of Windows. Even if it's displayed as Dx10 that doesn't mean you actually have Direct3D 10 which is needed for 100% DX10. Anyway, let's see if a DX10 game will start under these conditions because if it will that will prove i'm wrong.

Well what a big surprise ... i was actually 100% sure that it would not work. Going a little offtopic i want to ask you this:
Why would someone with a decent computer (considering he wants Dx10) would still use xp after 7 years from it's release when Windows 7 is just around the corner (yes i admit Vista kinda sucks) and will be what Vista should have been. Sure it eats more RAM, but let's face it... systems are built with a minimum of 2GB nowadays and 4GB systems are really common. As i discussed this in an earlier post, whats the point of having loads of memory if it's gonna be unused (as in xp). Vista at least occupies it with the most used programs which helps the starting time of those applications.

Back on topic, Windows XP DX10 is a myth and does NOT work as it should so i consider it BUSTED!