You are gonna use the WMP classes and/or XAML for this do you, DirectX is
not the API to use from WPF.

Willy.



[quoted text, click to view]
| For the purpose of planning ahead, I would use DirectX, if it was a choice
| between the 2. DirectX is going to be part of the foundation of Windows
| Presentation Services in Windows Vista.
|
| --
| HTH,
|
| Kevin Spencer
| Microsoft MVP
| .Net Developer
| We got a sick zebra a hat,
| you ultimate tuna.
|
|
[quoted text, click to view]
| > |I am writing an application in C# which need to plot graphs and simple
| > | shapes (polygons, circles, squares etc). Which library is better for
| > this
| > | purpose and why? Thanks.
| > |
| > |
| >
| > System.Drawing and System.Drawing.Drawing2D do contain the classes that
| > wrap
| > GDI++ and are in general all you need to draw simple shapes.
| >
| >
| > Willy.
| >
| >
|
|

[quoted text, click to view]

This is tiresome. What I *should* do is my business. What I *did* do is what
I did. I provided some information that was not a direct answer to the
question. So sue me.

Now be off wi' ye.

--

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
We got a sick zebra a hat,
you ultimate tuna.

1. You aren't supposed to program against DirectX on Vista (at least not in
managed code, which is what this NG is about, right?), you are gonna use
WinFX and the WPF framework classes which are a managed layer on top of
DirectX on XP or on top of a new graphics engine WGF, costing of Direct3D10
and the new hardware accelerated Graphics drivers on Vista.
Watch this...
http://windowssdk.msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/wcp_conceptual/html/66d7a6d6-e3b6-47bc-8dfe-8a1b26f7d901.asp

2.XAML is a new XML-based declarative programming language with the
potential to create UI without the need for code, and the potential of
drawing 2D shapes without code, which was the OP's request. <snip from the
URL you posted...
XAML enables you to create a UI without using code. You can create quite
elaborate documents or pages entirely in markup using controls, text,
images, shapes and so forth.
/snip>

3.
| You don't write graphics programming code with it. See ..
http://windowssdk.msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/directx9_c/dx9LH.asp?frame=true.

This page refers to the "unmanaged DirectX" interfaces available on Vista.
This is the API used by applications written in 'native' C++ code, are Vista
only API's and must run on hardware that implements the Windows Vista WDDM
(new driver model for hardware accelerated Graphical devices).

and ....
| And WMP is an acronym for "Windows Media Player," which has nothing to do
| this topic.

was a typo, sorry.

Willy.



[quoted text, click to view]
|> You are gonna use the WMP classes and/or XAML for this do you, DirectX is
| > not the API to use from WPF.
|
| First of all, XAML is a presentation language. See
|
http://windowssdk.msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/wcp_conceptual/html/a80db4cd-dd0f-479f-a45f-3740017c22e4.asp
|
| You don't write graphics programming code with it. See
|
http://windowssdk.msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/directx9_c/dx9LH.asp?frame=true.
|
| Direct3D is the graphics "layer" for Windows Vista. See
| http://msdn.microsoft.com/windowsvista/experience/
|
| To quote:
|
| "A new graphics driver model has been introduced with Windows Vista that
is
| stable and secure; it has built-in fault tolerance to enable constant use
of
| the graphics processor unit (GPU) for the rich graphics sported by the
| operating system and the applications. The GPU memory manager and
scheduler
| in this driver model enable multiple graphics applications to use the GPU
to
| run simultaneously.
| Windows Graphics Foundation 2.0 (WGF), also known as Direct3D10, sits on
top
| of, but is distinct from, the new driver model. Applications can use this
| application programming interface (API) for compelling next-generation
| cinematographic visuals as well as taking advantage of the massive
| computational horsepower available on the GPU for more general purpose
| applications that are easily parallelized (termed GPGPU). An example of
such
| use is image processing."
|
|
| And WMP is an acronym for "Windows Media Player," which has nothing to do
| this topic.
|
| --
| HTH,
|
| Kevin Spencer
| Microsoft MVP
| .Net Developer
| We got a sick zebra a hat,
| you ultimate tuna.
|
|
|
[quoted text, click to view]
| > You are gonna use the WMP classes and/or XAML for this do you, DirectX
is
| > not the API to use from WPF.
| >
| > Willy.
| >
| >
| >
[quoted text, click to view]
| > | For the purpose of planning ahead, I would use DirectX, if it was a
| > choice
| > | between the 2. DirectX is going to be part of the foundation of
Windows
| > | Presentation Services in Windows Vista.
| > |
| > | --
| > | HTH,
| > |
| > | Kevin Spencer
| > | Microsoft MVP
| > | .Net Developer
| > | We got a sick zebra a hat,
| > | you ultimate tuna.
| > |
| > |
[quoted text, click to view]
| > | > |I am writing an application in C# which need to plot graphs and
| > simple
| > | > | shapes (polygons, circles, squares etc). Which library is better
for
| > | > this
| > | > | purpose and why? Thanks.
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | >
| > | > System.Drawing and System.Drawing.Drawing2D do contain the classes
| > that
| > | > wrap
| > | > GDI++ and are in general all you need to draw simple shapes.
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > Willy.
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|

See inline

Willy.

[quoted text, click to view]
| Hi Willy,
|
| > 1. You aren't supposed to program against DirectX on Vista (at least not
| > in
| > managed code, which is what this NG is about, right?), you are gonna use
| > WinFX and the WPF framework classes which are a managed layer on top of
| > DirectX on XP or on top of a new graphics engine WGF, costing of
| > Direct3D10
| > and the new hardware accelerated Graphics drivers on Vista.
| > Watch this...
| >
http://windowssdk.msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/wcp_conceptual/html/66d7a6d6-e3b6-47bc-8dfe-8a1b26f7d901.asp
|
| First of all, the documentation you referred to was about a very limited
set
| of UI graphics, not all graphics, which includes 3D drawing. That
particular
| reference was to UI Controls only. In other words, there is a very limited
| set of (UI only) drawing you can do with this particular set of tools,
which
| is UI-specific. To give you an example from the current platform, you can
| create a form and you can override the Paint event to draw in 2 Dimensions
| on a Control. However, you cannot draw a 3D game interface on a Control
| using GDI+ or System.Drawing.Graphics. For that, you have to use DirectX.
|

Sorry, but you should read the OP's question first.

<snip
I am writing an application in C# which need to plot graphs and simple
shapes (polygons, circles, squares etc). Which library is better for this
purpose and why? Thanks.
/snip>

See, the question is about simple shapes, you don't need DirectX for this
point.
Then you suggested to use DirectX because it would be part of WPF on Vista,
And I say you don't need to go down that level to draw simple or even
complex shapes on Vista, just use the WPF classes they wrap 2D/3D complex
drawing using the WPF engine (called the Desktop Window Manager (DWM), which
uses only uses DirectX for rendering).


| These UI classes run on top of DirectX.

No, they are drawing classes in the System.Windows.Media and the
System.Windows.Media.Media3D namespaces, they run on top of DWM, they are
extremely powerfull/functional.
Please don't confuse WPF drawing/rendering with DirectX, both serve
different purposes, they run in different airspaces (just like native
Win32/GDI), both share the same DirectX rendering engine and the VDDM (Vista
Display Driver Model), while Win32/GDI uses the GDI rendering engine like on
all other Windows platforms.

They are not DirectX, but you can
| certainly draw using DirectX "directly." And, if you recall from my
original
| reply, I recommended DirectX *over OpenGL*, since in Vista, OpenGL is
likely
| to sit on top of DirectX as well, and therefore, not perform quite as
well.
| That I can't be sure of, but that is how I'd bet.
|
| As for DirectX being managed, I've been working with Managed Direct3D for
| almost 2 years now. No, the most current release of the DirectX SDK does
not
| contain a Managed DirectX library for Windows Vista. But it's coming, and
| when Vista is released, it will be here.
|

It does, it's called DirectX3D10! But you need Vista class driver and
hardware accelerated GPU's (actually, some limitted support ) to use them.
And I use them since a couple of months since I'm on the beta team for
Vista.


| > 2.XAML is a new XML-based declarative programming language with the
| > potential to create UI without the need for code, and the potential of
| > drawing 2D shapes without code, which was the OP's request. <snip from
the
| > URL you posted...
| > XAML enables you to create a UI without using code. You can create quite
| > elaborate documents or pages entirely in markup using controls, text,
| > images, shapes and so forth.
|
| Again, you're talking about UI only. If you limit yourself to a discussion
| of what to use to draw UI, you eliminate both DirectX and OpenGL from the
| conversation, regardless of whether you're discussing the current or next
| version of Windows.


No, I don't eliminate DirectX from the discussion, I just said you don't
need it to draw simple/shapes shapes and graphs on the current platform, and
certainly not on Vista, I don't want to push the OP towards something he/she
doesn't need.


And again, I was answering the question which is the
| title of this thread "directx or opengl." I was specifically addressing
this
| question, not the question of whether either of the 2 technologies was the
| best choice for doing simple graphics. This is exactly what I said: "For
the
| purpose of planning ahead, I would use DirectX, *if it was a choice
between
| the 2*." Obviously, neither is necessary for simple graphics. And UI-level
| classes will suffice for that purpose.
|
| > 3.
| > | You don't write graphics programming code with it. See ..
| >
http://windowssdk.msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/directx9_c/dx9LH.asp?frame=true.
| >
| > This page refers to the "unmanaged DirectX" interfaces available on
Vista.
| > This is the API used by applications written in 'native' C++ code, are
| > Vista
| > only API's and must run on hardware that implements the Windows Vista
WDDM
| > (new driver model for hardware accelerated Graphical devices).
|
| *I* do 3D graphics programming with Managed Direct3D. And I have every
| expectation that it will be available on Windows Vista, regardless of the
| fact that it hasn't been pre-released for it yet. Updates for managed
| DirectX come out every couple of months. And it's not going away.
|

See above native Direct3D10 is in the latest SDK (beta), but no (publicly
available) managed framework exists for it (yet).


| --
| HTH,
|
| Kevin Spencer
| Microsoft MVP
| .Net Developer
| We got a sick zebra a hat,
| you ultimate tuna.
|
|
[quoted text, click to view]
| > 1. You aren't supposed to program against DirectX on Vista (at least not
| > in
| > managed code, which is what this NG is about, right?), you are gonna use
| > WinFX and the WPF framework classes which are a managed layer on top of
| > DirectX on XP or on top of a new graphics engine WGF, costing of
| > Direct3D10
| > and the new hardware accelerated Graphics drivers on Vista.
| > Watch this...
| >
http://windowssdk.msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/wcp_conceptual/html/66d7a6d6-e3b6-47bc-8dfe-8a1b26f7d901.asp
| >
| > 2.XAML is a new XML-based declarative programming language with the
| > potential to create UI without the need for code, and the potential of
| > drawing 2D shapes without code, which was the OP's request. <snip from
the
| > URL you posted...
| > XAML enables you to create a UI without using code. You can create quite

Listen kid, I didn't get anything wrong. You had answered the fellow's
question just fine. I was providing other information which I thought might
be of interest to the general community. But apparently, you are one of
those people who feel they have to prove themselves to the world by arguing.

I don't use DirectX to draw simple shapes. I use it to model Geographic
information in 3 dimensions, based on GPS data in a small aircraft, combined
with USGS Geographic terrain and land cover data, FAA General aviation
airport data, weather data, travel information data, and aircraft instrument
data, in real time. It's an app that uses Indigo services (now known as
Windows Communication Foundation), was developed for the NASA SATS program,
and was demoed in Danville VA last March (about a year ago).I didn't write
the Indigo services, but I wrote every last scrap of the rest of it, all by
my lonesome. Bill Gates liked it when he saw it at the Microsoft Science
fair in October of 2004.

But what the heck, I'm just an ignoramus who doesn't know what tools to use
for what sort of purpose. On top of that, I thought that the OP ought to use
Direct 3D to draw simple shapes, rather than the System.Drawing and
System.Imaging namespaces, and was trying to "push him into it." Oh yes, I
forgot to add that I've also written an imaging library that uses those
namespaces to perform filtering on various types of images, create images on
the fly using text and/or image files as sources, convert them to various
formats, read and parse TIFF files and read and parse GeoTiff files, as well
as convert to and from various Geographic projections to 3-dimensional
cartesian coordinates. Darn if I didn't forget to follow my own advice and
use DirectX for that! What was I thinking?!

It's true, I haven't been beta testing this stuff for the past couple of
months. I went to Redmond to a preview of Indigo in October of 2004. I had
beta 1 of Windows Vista (known as Longhorn back then) on a virtual machine
over a year ago, along with beta 1 (and every beta since) of Visual
Studio.Net 2005 too. But I'll be the first to admit, I don't know what the
heck I'm doing with it, or what the heck I'm talking about!

It isn't possible that you could have misunderstood what I was saying. No,
you certainly did explain to me where I "got it wrong." I'm so ashamed.
Please, don't chastise me any more. I'll just listen and learn.

--
Yours in disgrace,

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
We got a sick zebra a hat,
you ultimate tuna.


[quoted text, click to view]

[quoted text, click to view]
| > Sorry, but you should read the OP's question first.
|
| This is tiresome. What I *should* do is my business. What I *did* do is
what
| I did. I provided some information that was not a direct answer to the
| question. So sue me.
|

What you did was suggest something based on a wrong assumption, I don't care
what you *do*, I don't care wheter you use DirectX to draw simple shapes,
all I *did* was trying to explain where you got it wrong. Butn I see, I just
wasted some time, no problem it won't happen again.

Willy.

Bravo, gentlemen! Still not sure who actually won this p*ssing
contest, but it sure made for some interesting morning reading.

Sorry, I couldn't resist :P Cheers to you both.

Personally, I'd settle for some mutual respect.

--

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
We got a sick zebra a hat,
you ultimate tuna.


[quoted text, click to view]