# DirectX not using video memory for surfaces in window mode!

**URL:** <https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/directx-not-using-video-memory-for-surfaces-in-window-mode/6639>\
**Category:** SDL Development\
**Created:** [May 15, 2002, 1:51pm UTC](https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/directx-not-using-video-memory-for-surfaces-in-window-mode/6639 "2002-05-15T13:51:01Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 17\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Sam\_Nova](https://discourse.libsdl.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Sam\_Nova](https://discourse.libsdl.org/u/Sam_Nova)\
**Post date:** [May 15, 2002, 1:51pm UTC](https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/directx-not-using-video-memory-for-surfaces-in-window-mode/6639/1 "2002-05-15T13:51:01Z")

</div>

Hi all,

Just wanted to check if anyone got DirectX working in Window mode… I mean,  
in a way where surfaces can be in video memory…

See also my post with the subject ‘Windows: Why is SDL not using hardware  
for surfaces in window mode ?’

Best,

Sam

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Robert\_Sadedin](https://discourse.libsdl.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/r/41988e/32.png) [@Robert\_Sadedin](https://discourse.libsdl.org/u/Robert_Sadedin)\
**Post date:** [May 15, 2002, 2:00pm UTC](https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/directx-not-using-video-memory-for-surfaces-in-window-mode/6639/2 "2002-05-15T14:00:01Z")

</div>

I believe that in a window you are trapped to the bit depth and video mode  
that your desktop is running in.  
Windows (and all OSes I think) uses software surfaces, and therefore so must  
your application, unless you run it fullscreen.\> ----- Original Message -----

> From: [sam@novalicious.com](mailto:sam@novalicious.com) (Sam Nova)  
> To:   
> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 6:51 AM  
> Subject: [SDL] DirectX not using video memory for surfaces in window mode !
> 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Just wanted to check if anyone got DirectX working in Window mode… I  
> > mean,  
> > in a way where surfaces can be in video memory…
> > 
> > See also my post with the subject ‘Windows: Why is SDL not using hardware  
> > for surfaces in window mode ?’
> > 
> > Best,
> > 
> > Sam
> > 
> > * * *
> > 
> > SDL mailing list  
> > SDL at [libsdl.org](http://libsdl.org)  
> > [http://www.libsdl.org/mailman/listinfo/sdl](http://www.libsdl.org/mailman/listinfo/sdl)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Sam\_Nova](https://discourse.libsdl.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Sam\_Nova](https://discourse.libsdl.org/u/Sam_Nova)\
**Post date:** [May 15, 2002, 3:46pm UTC](https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/directx-not-using-video-memory-for-surfaces-in-window-mode/6639/3 "2002-05-15T15:46:01Z")

</div>

> I believe that in a window you are trapped to the bit depth and video mode  
> that your desktop is running in.

This sounds VERY right. My card is running in 32 bit mode, so I do  
following:  
screen = SDL\_SetVideoMode(640, 480, 32, SDL\_HWSURFACE | SDL\_DOUBLEBUF);

Could this be a problem, that SDL might give me RGBA but the card might run  
BGRA or something ? If this is the problem, then how do I get the  
information ?

> Windows (and all OSes I think) uses software surfaces, and  
> therefore so must  
> your application, unless you run it fullscreen.

Still DirectX allows window mode to be used with hardware buffers. !!

-Sam\>

> ----- Original Message -----  
> From: “Sam Nova” \<@Sam\_Nova\>  
> To:   
> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 6:51 AM  
> Subject: [SDL] DirectX not using video memory for surfaces in  
> window mode !
> 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Just wanted to check if anyone got DirectX working in Window mode… I  
> > mean,  
> > in a way where surfaces can be in video memory…
> > 
> > See also my post with the subject ‘Windows: Why is SDL not  
> > using hardware  
> > for surfaces in window mode ?’
> > 
> > Best,
> > 
> > Sam
> > 
> > * * *
> > 
> > SDL mailing list  
> > SDL at [libsdl.org](http://libsdl.org)  
> > [http://www.libsdl.org/mailman/listinfo/sdl](http://www.libsdl.org/mailman/listinfo/sdl)
> 
> * * *
> 
> SDL mailing list  
> SDL at [libsdl.org](http://libsdl.org)  
> [http://www.libsdl.org/mailman/listinfo/sdl](http://www.libsdl.org/mailman/listinfo/sdl)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Joseph\_Carter](https://discourse.libsdl.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/47e85d/32.png) [@Joseph\_Carter](https://discourse.libsdl.org/u/Joseph_Carter)\
**Post date:** [May 15, 2002, 5:41pm UTC](https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/directx-not-using-video-memory-for-surfaces-in-window-mode/6639/4 "2002-05-15T17:41:00Z")

</div>

Actually, I would be interested in getting a Direct3D context similar to  
how you get an OpenGL context, but using DirectInput and all… Some 3D  
stuff lends itself reasonably well to being targetted at both OpenGL and  
D3D. Since too many card vendors have crappy OpenGL drivers but decent  
D3D, it’s worthwhile for us to consider offering the support even if it  
will be faster to use OpenGL.

Serious Sam 2, for example, does this. It doesn’t use SDL I assume, but  
Ryan might have a couple of comments about this. Possibly not though, I  
don’t know how evil an NDA he was forced to sign to be allowed to work on  
porting it… ;)On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 10:51:49PM +0200, Sam Nova wrote:

> Just wanted to check if anyone got DirectX working in Window mode… I mean,  
> in a way where surfaces can be in video memory…

–  
Joseph Carter Goldfish don’t bounce

- Knghtbrd notes he has mashed potatoes for brains tonight  
 yum, can I have some?  
 um …
- Knghtbrd hides from Valkyrie

-------------- next part --------------  
A non-text attachment was scrubbed…  
Name: not available  
Type: application/pgp-signature  
Size: 273 bytes  
Desc: not available  
URL: [http://lists.libsdl.org/pipermail/sdl-libsdl.org/attachments/20020515/e854b913/attachment.pgp](http://lists.libsdl.org/pipermail/sdl-libsdl.org/attachments/20020515/e854b913/attachment.pgp)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Matthew\_Miller](https://discourse.libsdl.org/user_avatar/discourse.libsdl.org/matthew_miller/32/185_2.png) [@Matthew\_Miller](https://discourse.libsdl.org/u/Matthew_Miller)\
**Post date:** [May 15, 2002, 6:34pm UTC](https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/directx-not-using-video-memory-for-surfaces-in-window-mode/6639/5 "2002-05-15T18:34:00Z")

</div>

Ah, just what the world needs – a Windows-specific cross-platform  
library… :)On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 05:41:35PM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote:

> Actually, I would be interested in getting a Direct3D context similar to  
> how you get an OpenGL context, but using DirectInput and all… Some 3D  
> stuff lends itself reasonably well to being targetted at both OpenGL and  
> D3D. Since too many card vendors have crappy OpenGL drivers but decent  
> D3D, it’s worthwhile for us to consider offering the support even if it  
> will be faster to use OpenGL.

–  
Matthew Miller @Matthew_Miller[http://www.mattdm.org/](http://www.mattdm.org/)  
Boston University Linux ------\> [http://linux.bu.edu/](http://linux.bu.edu/)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Joseph\_Carter](https://discourse.libsdl.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/47e85d/32.png) [@Joseph\_Carter](https://discourse.libsdl.org/u/Joseph_Carter)\
**Post date:** [May 15, 2002, 6:58pm UTC](https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/directx-not-using-video-memory-for-surfaces-in-window-mode/6639/6 "2002-05-15T18:58:01Z")

</div>

That’s not what I want and you know it. =)

What I want is, in the case we have D3D available (Win32), we may use it  
in place of OpenGL at the user’s request, since it’s just a back-end to  
our renderer. We’re already going to potentially need more than one  
back-end unless ATI and NVIDIA pull their heads out and start cooperating  
on extensions.On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:34:43PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:

> > Actually, I would be interested in getting a Direct3D context similar to  
> > how you get an OpenGL context, but using DirectInput and all… Some 3D  
> > stuff lends itself reasonably well to being targetted at both OpenGL and  
> > D3D. Since too many card vendors have crappy OpenGL drivers but decent  
> > D3D, it’s worthwhile for us to consider offering the support even if it  
> > will be faster to use OpenGL.
> 
> Ah, just what the world needs – a Windows-specific cross-platform  
> library… 🙂

–  
Joseph Carter ← That boy needs therapy

RFC 882 put the dot in .com, not Sun Microsystems  
– Seen on Slashdot

-------------- next part --------------  
A non-text attachment was scrubbed…  
Name: not available  
Type: application/pgp-signature  
Size: 273 bytes  
Desc: not available  
URL: [http://lists.libsdl.org/pipermail/sdl-libsdl.org/attachments/20020515/64f656e3/attachment.pgp](http://lists.libsdl.org/pipermail/sdl-libsdl.org/attachments/20020515/64f656e3/attachment.pgp)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![icculus](https://discourse.libsdl.org/user_avatar/discourse.libsdl.org/icculus/32/81_2.png) [@icculus](https://discourse.libsdl.org/u/icculus)\
**Post date:** [May 15, 2002, 7:18pm UTC](https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/directx-not-using-video-memory-for-surfaces-in-window-mode/6639/7 "2002-05-15T19:18:00Z")

</div>

> Serious Sam 2, for example, does this. It doesn’t use SDL I assume, but  
> Ryan might have a couple of comments about this. Possibly not though, I  
> don’t know how evil an NDA he was forced to sign to be allowed to work on  
> porting it… 😉

If we’re talking about 2D surfaces, this has nothing in common with the  
Serious Engine.

Lots of engines have both GL and D3D support, and what they do is add an  
abstraction layer. Instead of glVertex() you’d call  
my3DAPI\_specifyVertex() or whatnot and then the engine will route that  
through the correct API. In practical terms, this is a pain, because you  
count on rendering APIs to have similar pipelines or you limit yourself to  
more generic 3D stuff (define polygon, map a texture onto it, etc).

If we’re talking about mapping OpenGL calls to Direct3D…nothing I know  
of (Serious Engine or otherwise) does that.

–ryan.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Joseph\_Carter](https://discourse.libsdl.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/47e85d/32.png) [@Joseph\_Carter](https://discourse.libsdl.org/u/Joseph_Carter)\
**Post date:** [May 15, 2002, 7:57pm UTC](https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/directx-not-using-video-memory-for-surfaces-in-window-mode/6639/8 "2002-05-15T19:57:01Z")

</div>

> If we’re talking about 2D surfaces, this has nothing in common with the  
> Serious Engine.

We’re not. =)

> Lots of engines have both GL and D3D support, and what they do is add an  
> abstraction layer. Instead of glVertex() you’d call  
> my3DAPI\_specifyVertex() or whatnot and then the engine will route that  
> through the correct API. In practical terms, this is a pain, because you  
> count on rendering APIs to have similar pipelines or you limit yourself to  
> more generic 3D stuff (define polygon, map a texture onto it, etc).

Yes, generally speaking this is what I meant. Though in my case, the  
abstraction layer looks more like my3DAPI\_CramLotsOfGeometryToCard () most  
of the time. 😉

> If we’re talking about mapping OpenGL calls to Direct3D…nothing I know  
> of (Serious Engine or otherwise) does that.

There is a wrapper to go the other direction. It’s not very good or very  
fast, but it works. It was implemented as an exercise to prove it could  
be done relatively easily and perhaps annoy someone at Microsoft. I’m not  
sure it succeeded in any of these goals, but it actually did run with a  
few examples I tried for the sake of trying with only minor porting work.On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 10:22:27PM -0400, Ryan C. Gordon wrote:

–  
Joseph Carter You expected a coherent reply?

uh oh, what have I started 🙂  
 rofl… distro nick wars.

- Slackware just waits for /nick Gnome, /nick KDE, and then world war 4  
to break out  
 :oP  
  
🙂  
 no’one would dare /nick RedHat  
 mew.

-------------- next part --------------  
A non-text attachment was scrubbed…  
Name: not available  
Type: application/pgp-signature  
Size: 273 bytes  
Desc: not available  
URL: [http://lists.libsdl.org/pipermail/sdl-libsdl.org/attachments/20020515/d732ac89/attachment.pgp](http://lists.libsdl.org/pipermail/sdl-libsdl.org/attachments/20020515/d732ac89/attachment.pgp)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gabriele\_Greco](https://discourse.libsdl.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/8edcca/32.png) [@Gabriele\_Greco](https://discourse.libsdl.org/u/Gabriele_Greco)\
**Post date:** [May 16, 2002, 1:28am UTC](https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/directx-not-using-video-memory-for-surfaces-in-window-mode/6639/9 "2002-05-16T01:28:01Z")

</div>

At 06:54 AM 5/16/02 +1000, you wrote:

> I believe that in a window you are trapped to the bit depth and video mode  
> that your desktop is running in.  
> Windows (and all OSes I think) uses software surfaces, and therefore so must  
> your application, unless you run it fullscreen.

As far as I’ve seen the only SDL implementation that allow HW surfaces on  
windowed mode is the AmigaOS port I’ve done. The problem is that the  
application should read the correct pitch value (that is the desktop screen  
one and not the window width) and that if you cover the SDL window with  
another window the graphics is drawn anyway. The nice thing is that you  
have HW acceleration on every mode if you want (and for machines with low  
CPU power and slow memory bandwidth like Amigas the HW accel is VERY  
important).

I wonder if I should maintain this behaviour or if I should force soft  
bitmaps for windowed mode.

Bye,  
Gabry (gabrielegreco at tin.it)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![EvilTypeGuy](https://discourse.libsdl.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/e/ecae2f/32.png) [@EvilTypeGuy](https://discourse.libsdl.org/u/EvilTypeGuy)\
**Post date:** [May 16, 2002, 7:19am UTC](https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/directx-not-using-video-memory-for-surfaces-in-window-mode/6639/10 "2002-05-16T07:19:01Z")

</div>

‘winex’ does /me runs and hides

-EvilTypeGuyOn Wed, May 15, 2002 at 10:22:27PM -0400, Ryan C. Gordon wrote:

> > Serious Sam 2, for example, does this. It doesn’t use SDL I assume, but  
> > Ryan might have a couple of comments about this. Possibly not though, I  
> > don’t know how evil an NDA he was forced to sign to be allowed to work on  
> > porting it… 😉  
> > If we’re talking about mapping OpenGL calls to Direct3D…nothing I know  
> > of (Serious Engine or otherwise) does that.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![icculus](https://discourse.libsdl.org/user_avatar/discourse.libsdl.org/icculus/32/81_2.png) [@icculus](https://discourse.libsdl.org/u/icculus)\
**Post date:** [May 16, 2002, 8:12am UTC](https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/directx-not-using-video-memory-for-surfaces-in-window-mode/6639/11 "2002-05-16T08:12:01Z")

</div>

> > If we’re talking about mapping OpenGL calls to Direct3D…nothing I know  
> > of (Serious Engine or otherwise) does that.
> 
> ‘winex’ does /me runs and hides

No, it doesn’t: WineX maps Direct3D calls to OpenGL.

Not that this matters; doing this in SDL means that we’d have to have not  
just GL context creation, but an entire OpenGL wrapper, which would suck  
to maintain. (Doubly so if we we started emulating OpenGL with Direct3D  
calls inside this wrapper.)

Oh, and blahblahblah, positive reinforcement to driver developers for  
supporting closed “standards” better than open ones, blahblahblah.

–ryan.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![EvilTypeGuy](https://discourse.libsdl.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/e/ecae2f/32.png) [@EvilTypeGuy](https://discourse.libsdl.org/u/EvilTypeGuy)\
**Post date:** [May 16, 2002, 8:31am UTC](https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/directx-not-using-video-memory-for-surfaces-in-window-mode/6639/12 "2002-05-16T08:31:59Z")

</div>

Oops. Sorry, I was thinking that way, not the other way around 🙂 My bad.

-EvilTypeGuyOn Thu, May 16, 2002 at 11:16:12AM -0400, Ryan C. Gordon wrote:

> > > If we’re talking about mapping OpenGL calls to Direct3D…nothing I know  
> > > of (Serious Engine or otherwise) does that.
> > 
> > ‘winex’ does /me runs and hides
> 
> No, it doesn’t: WineX maps Direct3D calls to OpenGL.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![slouken](https://discourse.libsdl.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/ec9cab/32.png) [@slouken](https://discourse.libsdl.org/u/slouken)\
**Post date:** [May 16, 2002, 8:46am UTC](https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/directx-not-using-video-memory-for-surfaces-in-window-mode/6639/13 "2002-05-16T08:46:01Z")

</div>

> As far as I’ve seen the only SDL implementation that allow HW surfaces on  
> windowed mode is the AmigaOS port I’ve done. The problem is that the  
> application should read the correct pitch value (that is the desktop screen  
> one and not the window width) and that if you cover the SDL window with  
> another window the graphics is drawn anyway. The nice thing is that you  
> have HW acceleration on every mode if you want (and for machines with low  
> CPU power and slow memory bandwidth like Amigas the HW accel is VERY  
> important).

> I wonder if I should maintain this behaviour or if I should force soft  
> bitmaps for windowed mode.

I’ve forced soft bitmaps for windowed mode on the principle that if you’re  
running in windowed mode, you should be a nice windowed app and not write  
all over other windows. If you can get hardware accelerated blitting and  
clipping working together, then by all means, allow hardware surfaces.

See ya,  
-Sam Lantinga, Software Engineer, Blizzard Entertainment

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gabriele\_Greco](https://discourse.libsdl.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/8edcca/32.png) [@Gabriele\_Greco](https://discourse.libsdl.org/u/Gabriele_Greco)\
**Post date:** [May 16, 2002, 9:01am UTC](https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/directx-not-using-video-memory-for-surfaces-in-window-mode/6639/14 "2002-05-16T09:01:00Z")

</div>

At 08:45 AM 5/16/02 -0700, you wrote:

> > I wonder if I should maintain this behaviour or if I should force soft  
> > bitmaps for windowed mode.  
> > I’ve forced soft bitmaps for windowed mode on the principle that if you’re  
> > running in windowed mode, you should be a nice windowed app and not write  
> > all over other windows. If you can get hardware accelerated blitting and  
> > clipping working together, then by all means, allow hardware surfaces.

Sadly clipping, as you correctly thought, doesn’t work, I’ve received just  
today a mail by a user about the fact that some ports use to write on the  
other desktop windows. I think I’ll change that, since most apps simply do:

SDL\_SetVideoMode(x,x,x,SDL\_HWSURFACE | x);

…both for windowed and fullscreen modes and this bring inconsistent  
behaviours on straight ports…

Bye,  
Gabry (gabrielegreco at tin.it)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Sam\_Nova](https://discourse.libsdl.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Sam\_Nova](https://discourse.libsdl.org/u/Sam_Nova)\
**Post date:** [May 16, 2002, 1:41pm UTC](https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/directx-not-using-video-memory-for-surfaces-in-window-mode/6639/15 "2002-05-16T13:41:01Z")

</div>

> > As far as I’ve seen the only SDL implementation that allow HW  
> > surfaces on  
> > windowed mode is the AmigaOS port I’ve done. The problem is that the  
> > application should read the correct pitch value (that is the  
> > desktop screen  
> > one and not the window width) and that if you cover the SDL window with  
> > another window the graphics is drawn anyway. The nice thing is that you  
> > have HW acceleration on every mode if you want (and for  
> > machines with low  
> > CPU power and slow memory bandwidth like Amigas the HW accel is VERY  
> > important).
> 
> > I wonder if I should maintain this behaviour or if I should force soft  
> > bitmaps for windowed mode.
> 
> I’ve forced soft bitmaps for windowed mode on the principle that if you’re  
> running in windowed mode, you should be a nice windowed app and not write  
> all over other windows. If you can get hardware accelerated blitting and  
> clipping working together, then by all means, allow hardware surfaces.

Sorry, I don’t follow you (I’m NOT saying you are wrong). But when looking  
at Allegro that uses hardware (DirectX) to do window modes, I get confused.  
Okay, they stop the application when it isn’t the active one !!! (or at  
least this is what they did on the examples I looked at). Please let me know  
what clippings you are talking about, so I can follow you.

best,

Sam\>

> See ya,  
> -Sam Lantinga, Software Engineer, Blizzard Entertainment
> 
> * * *
> 
> SDL mailing list  
> SDL at [libsdl.org](http://libsdl.org)  
> [http://www.libsdl.org/mailman/listinfo/sdl](http://www.libsdl.org/mailman/listinfo/sdl)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Sam\_Nova](https://discourse.libsdl.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Sam\_Nova](https://discourse.libsdl.org/u/Sam_Nova)\
**Post date:** [May 18, 2002, 2:12pm UTC](https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/directx-not-using-video-memory-for-surfaces-in-window-mode/6639/16 "2002-05-18T14:12:01Z")

</div>

No comments ?

And one question to Sam Lantinga, do you plan to change the window mode to  
use hardware for the next big release (2.0) ?

-Sam Nova\> -----Original Message-----

> From: sdl-admin at [libsdl.org](http://libsdl.org) [mailto:sdl-admin at [libsdl.org](http://libsdl.org)]On Behalf Of Sam  
> Nova  
> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 10:42 PM  
> To: sdl at [libsdl.org](http://libsdl.org)  
> Subject: RE: [SDL] DirectX not using video memory for surfaces in window  
> mode !
> 
> > > As far as I’ve seen the only SDL implementation that allow HW  
> > > surfaces on  
> > > windowed mode is the AmigaOS port I’ve done. The problem is that the  
> > > application should read the correct pitch value (that is the  
> > > desktop screen  
> > > one and not the window width) and that if you cover the SDL  
> > > window with  
> > > another window the graphics is drawn anyway. The nice thing  
> > > is that you  
> > > have HW acceleration on every mode if you want (and for  
> > > machines with low  
> > > CPU power and slow memory bandwidth like Amigas the HW accel is VERY  
> > > important).
> > 
> > > I wonder if I should maintain this behaviour or if I should force soft  
> > > bitmaps for windowed mode.
> > 
> > I’ve forced soft bitmaps for windowed mode on the principle  
> > that if you’re  
> > running in windowed mode, you should be a nice windowed app and  
> > not write  
> > all over other windows. If you can get hardware accelerated  
> > blitting and  
> > clipping working together, then by all means, allow hardware surfaces.
> 
> Sorry, I don’t follow you (I’m NOT saying you are wrong). But when looking  
> at Allegro that uses hardware (DirectX) to do window modes, I get  
> confused.  
> Okay, they stop the application when it isn’t the active one !!! (or at  
> least this is what they did on the examples I looked at). Please  
> let me know  
> what clippings you are talking about, so I can follow you.
> 
> best,
> 
> Sam
> 
> > See ya,  
> > -Sam Lantinga, Software Engineer, Blizzard Entertainment
> > 
> > * * *
> > 
> > SDL mailing list  
> > SDL at [libsdl.org](http://libsdl.org)  
> > [http://www.libsdl.org/mailman/listinfo/sdl](http://www.libsdl.org/mailman/listinfo/sdl)
> 
> * * *
> 
> SDL mailing list  
> SDL at [libsdl.org](http://libsdl.org)  
> [http://www.libsdl.org/mailman/listinfo/sdl](http://www.libsdl.org/mailman/listinfo/sdl)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![slouken](https://discourse.libsdl.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/ec9cab/32.png) [@slouken](https://discourse.libsdl.org/u/slouken)\
**Post date:** [May 18, 2002, 5:53pm UTC](https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/directx-not-using-video-memory-for-surfaces-in-window-mode/6639/17 "2002-05-18T17:53:01Z")

</div>

> No comments ?

> And one question to Sam Lantinga, do you plan to change the window mode to  
> use hardware for the next big release (2.0) ?

Yes, it will be an option on some platforms.

See ya,  
-Sam Lantinga, Software Engineer, Blizzard Entertainment