Subj : Re: Full DirectX 9.0c End-User Runtime (November 2010)? To : All From : V@nguard.LH Date : Thu Jan 31 2019 19:14:23 Path: mx04.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!n ews.albasani.net!not-for-mail From: VanguardLH Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.games Subject: Re: Full DirectX 9.0c End-User Runtime (November 2010)? Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 16:38:49 -0600 Organization: 0.35MOA sniper at loose in Usenet Lines: 67 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: news.albasani.net 98BsSBG5M0v4ypcOHN+PWn7xpxJmR8AH4o01iyNJdmOOrWxQaEptjE4KX5E9pMUM94DMVbD/bqrfeH4 7S0aEp8mqX5vf+D0aXTXyTe6NSRg78O448eMCprU5nxFFxCnY NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 22:37:56 +0000 (UTC) Keywords: VanguardLH VLH811 Cancel-Lock: sha1:hYaiMyAPkShXjUQryhi1KxCFLn8= User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.41 Injection-Info: news.albasani.net; logging-data="Fsy26n596TGfKPnBhdAv+u/XcPqIUUddAdLqM7gE+TnVf8m8KLnU2qm2I2PTYZ2sH Db5cDjcMNhnEgtdaHpweg0HEUPK1rPfhByNlzcyINoJY1KtzB8q7JYMOuyBkWk6"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@albasani.net" X-MOTD: It is wiser to remain silent and let others ponder your ignorance than to speak and remove all doubt Xref: feeder.eternal-september.org microsoft.public.windowsxp.games:391 Ant wrote: > On 12/22/2010 10:27 AM PT, VanguardLH typed: > >>>>> How come Microsoft/MS hasn't posted the full DirectX 9.0c End-User >>>>> Runtime (November 2010) on the Internet? I don't want its dxsetup.exe to >>>>> download parts online on my crappy Internet connection. :( >>>> >>>> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=2da43d38-db71-4c1b- bc6a-9b6652cd92a3 >>>> >>>> This is the web installer (the one that you don't want). If you look >>>> carefully at that web download page, you'll find the full RT download >>>> that you are looking for (95.6MB in size). >>> >>> If you're referring to >>> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?displaylang=en&FamilyID=3b17 0b25-abab-4bc3-ae91-50ceb6d8fa8d >>> ... Then, that's not November 2010 version. I already have June 2010. :( >> >> It's the 9.0c version that you asked about. >> >> Web installer: v9.0c, version 9.29.1973, published 11/30/2010 >> Redistributable: v9.0c, version 9.29.1962, published 06/07/2010 >> >> The DX version in both is the same (9.0c). The packaging has a slightly >> different version. Don't know what is different between the >> installation actions of the different package types (local vs. web) but >> then both are delivering the 9.0c of the *product*. >> >> There may have been reasons why Microsoft generated a new web installer >> package. That doesn't mean they had to also go change the local >> (redistributable) package. Also, the November web installer points to >> the June redistributable package. That's what Microsoft tells you to >> use. >> >> The June package is the redistributable installer for the 9.0c version. >> The November package is the latest incarnation of their web installer >> for the same 9.0c version. > > There are game demos and graphic demos that require the latest DirectX > 9.0c based on its release date (e.g., June 2010). Inside the June 2010 > redistributable installer with an archive viewer, I did see some > newer/updated DirectX file. :( Sounds like some goofy coding for poorly designed programs that should be querying for the DX version rather than looking at file revisions or modified datestamps for them. Looks like wanting to use these goofy programs means you're stuck using the web installer if it ends up putting different timestamps on the files. I have a virtual machine that runs Windows XP SP-3 as the guest OS. dxdiag.exe shows the DX version is "9.0c (4.0.9.0000.0904)". This is the same DX version reported by my host OS (also Windows XP Pro SP-3). Both have been fully updated. I then ran the local (redistributable) installer dated June 2010. dxdiag still reported the same version info. I then used the web installer (but deselected the Bing Toolbar option which means the web installer is adware) and still got the same version info reported by dxdiag. I suppose the installers won't install an older version; i.e., for some Windows updates, you can only move forward, not backward. That would mean that using Windows Updates to keep these hosts up to date already has the latest version of DX and the installers can't go any further. You'll have to ask those game and demo "developers" on just what they are testing since both the redistributable and web installers seem to end up installing the same version of DirectX (or, at least, can't update DirectX any further than what I've gotten through Windows Updates). --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.1 * Origin: Prison Board BBS Mesquite Tx //telnet.RDFIG.NET www. (1:124/5013) .