digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

DirectX 10 and the Future of Gaming

bit-tech.net — Vista launched today, and the new OS promises (eventually) to give gamers a whole new world with DirectX 10. The article goes into some of DX10's offerings and why it will be great for developers, and therefore gamers. It's a bit of a technical read, but very interesting.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • boscorelle, on 10/12/2007, -5/+18nice in depth article

    Quote:
    "It is a new way of designing drivers - meaning an end to ForceWare and Catalyst Control Center as we know them. Whilst the applications might stay similar on the surface, the backend of display drivers will now be significantly different."

    sounds like Directx 10 has some surprises in store for us
    • SmokeTetsu, on 10/12/2007, -11/+0I hope it means even though those panels will be different things like stereovision drivers for nvidia still work.
    • greyfade, on 10/12/2007, -13/+17After perusing the article, I still personally fail to see what advantages DirectX 10 has over OpenGL 2.0 (which seems to provide a completely orthogonal featureset and still does not suffer from the poor assumptions that previous DirectX versions made that DX10 purports to fix). In fact, DirectX 10's biggest new feature is something that OpenGL has never had a problem with (and, in fact, took advantage of): usermode marshalling. The X Window server has always been usermode, and all implementations of OpenGL that I'm aware of have been written to operate on a driver interface layer of X - an idiom Microsoft ignored for many years. Users of Cg for nVidia cards and ATi's RenderMonkey have long known that OpenGL's support for pixel/vertex shaders has been wide open - only now unified and standardized by Microsoft's hand in SM 4.0 - at least, by my understanding of the specifications.

      I really don't see anything new here.
    • vertinox, on 10/12/2007, -20/+5@"sounds like Directx 10 has some surprises in store for us"

      What do you mean "us"? Did I just wake up in a strange universe where I can I get DX10 for my mac?
    • cquinnd, on 10/12/2007, -12/+4vertinox

      Macs use Intel processors now, they have used ATI and Nvidia graphics for years, so there is nothing more than the current premium on the parts to keep Apple from
      considering buidling a Mac with DX10 capable hardware.
    • erikerikerik, on 10/12/2007, -11/+6@greyfade

      First, were at OpenGL 2.1 now.
      that's peachy, but not everyone friggen knows what a "X server" is. Not everyone plays around with *nix.

      I also personally believe that OpenGL would have died if it wasn't for the insane algorithms cooked up by the ID team with their Doom3 engine. Look at what most games are rendered for,
      D10, or OGL2.1?
      D10 by leaps and bounds.
    • Mirag3, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2if by "released" you mean released to production, then yes. Although, released to production doesnt really mean anything - it wont even be available to volume buyers until the end of December and everybody else until January,
    • Fergy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6[quote]Macs use Intel processors now, they have used ATI and Nvidia graphics for years, so there is nothing more than the current premium on the parts to keep Apple from
      considering buidling a Mac with DX10 capable hardware.[/quote]
      DirectX10 will not be ported to either Windows XP MacOS or Linux so what good does Directx10 capable hardware do for you?
    • Grogtron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1 by Mirag3 13 minutes ago
      if by "released" you mean released to production, then yes. Although, released to production doesnt really mean anything - it wont even be available to volume buyers until the end of December and everybody else until January,
      ---
      Actually you can get it from Compusa. 5 or more licenses to download and install. Volume customers also have it available today...

      http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,127865-pg,1-RSS,RSS/article.html
    • palmer, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Way to cheerlead another proprietary hassle created by Microsoft. If all of this effort had been put into OpenGL, everybody would benefit and graphics-card vendors wouldn't have to waste time on two different standards.

      Now we're all penalized by this waste of engineering resources.
    • cquinnd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2DX10 is both hardware and software. It will not be ported back to XP because it requires that the whole GUI be capable of rendering using the 3D hardware. Which OSX and some Linux Window managers are capable of.

      If you think that ATI and Nvidia would agree to build DX10 hardware without having some option for other software uses, then you are greatly underestimating the graphics market.

    • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1[quote]After perusing the article, I still personally fail to see what advantages DirectX 10 has over OpenGL 2.0[/quote]

      It allows script kiddies to act like they're graphics programmers and make buggy, bloated games.
    • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2[quote]DX10 is both hardware and software. It will not be ported back to XP because it requires that the whole GUI be capable of rendering using the 3D hardware.[/quote]

      Umm... no. DX10 hardware is what makes the difference. You can send D3D10 instructions to that hardware any way you want. OpenGL, with exensions, can do it. The only difference is that XP's drivers won't let you have the same system-wide use of DX10, so it will be limited solely to one app at a time.

      With 768MB DX10 graphics cards on the way, you're not going to have to worry about using system memory for graphics much either.

      DX10 will be ported if Vista is not a success. Even better, I hope more game devs go back to OpenGL, and OpenAL.
  • Snakedal337, on 10/16/2007, -6/+29That reminds me, any vista torrents up yet? >: )
    • TenebrousX, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2yes, they have been for weeks actually

      no crack though
  • tylerni7, on 10/12/2007, -8/+7I'm sure it's great and all, but jeez have you seen the price of those graphic cards? The cheapest are around $500! http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?Category=38&N=2010380048+1305520548+106791921&Submit=ENE&SubCategory=48 You could get a few 7950s in SLI mode for that price.
    • goat2, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16considering those cards arent dx10, and the ONE 8800 is BETTER than 2 7950's in sli, the 8800 is a better choice
    • dickeytk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16that's not that extreme for high end video cards, they've been up in that range for years
    • steeel2, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I thought those card were D10x

      "EVGA E-GEFORCE 8800 Gts 500MHZ 640MB 1.6GHZ GDDR3 Dual DVI-I HDTV Out HDCP DIRECTX10 Video Card "

      http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=21406&vpn=640-P2-N821-AR&manufacture=eVGA
    • steeel2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"GeForce 8800 New Technology:

      * NVIDIA® unified architecture revolutionizes PC graphics performance through unprecedented processing power and efficiency
      * World’s first DirectX 10 GPU delivers unparalleled levels of graphics realism and film-quality effects
      * NVIDIA Lumenex™ engine delivers incredible image quality, floating point accuracy, and fast frame rates
      * NVIDIA Quantum Effects™ technology enables a new level of physics effects to be simulated and rendered on the GPU

      All these new technologies allow the e-GeForce 8 series of GPU processors allowing PC Platforms to experience high-resolution, high performance gaming and stellar high-definition visuals."
  • Ub3rg33k, on 10/12/2007, -39/+20Why do I suddenly feel the urge to become vastly more proficient in Ubuntu?
    • goat2, on 10/12/2007, -25/+20because youre a dumbass
    • dickeytk, on 10/12/2007, -20/+7good question... why would you?
    • sleepyness, on 10/12/2007, -18/+18goat2 is correct, Ub3rg33k is a dumbass.
    • MooseFruit, on 10/12/2007, -18/+14agree with goat, Ub3rg33k is a dumbass for making that dumbassed unrelated comment, dumbass.
    • BuckCynnie, on 10/12/2007, -16/+6A lot of people are feeling the urge.
    • seanmac, on 10/12/2007, -6/+17Ubuntu != Linux
  • siddhartha211, on 10/16/2007, -5/+23Pretty nice, but OpenGL will be just as good with the next version.
    • osc1882, on 10/16/2007, -9/+22What is OpenGL up to? I'll have to forgive me, but I really thought OpenGL died. If it's still alive and well that will make me happy.
    • TGMD, on 10/12/2007, -9/+11I don't know, I love OpenGL but MS has been doing a bang up job with DX and DX 10 is really impressive, I just don't see how OpenGL can put something together fast enough that can properly compete against DX.
    • Drealoth, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10I don't know about that. I'm as big a fan of open source as anyone, but it looks like this version of DirectX 10 is a big step forward. Whether OpenGL will be able to catch up remains to be seen. Modern times are seeing fewer and fewer developers using OpenGL, so the demand for these advanced features would probably be pretty low.

      One can hope, though.
    • doodlebumm, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9http://opengl.org/

      The DirectX stuff also handles audio and such, but OpenGL is purely graphics. One can easily argue that the OpenGL route will give far greater portability, which is more than one can say for DirectX, which is Windows only. And 10 will be Vista+ only from what I've heard. OpenGL would be more backwards compatible, and more platform independent, so it would be able to more easily run on MacOS and Linux, as well as available to older WindowsXP users (the WindowsXP is older, not the users).
    • doodlebumm, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6The proliferation of DirectX 10 will be directly related to the proliferation of Vista. There may be plenty of time for OpenGL to "catch up" or even surpass DirectX 10 before a critical mass has been achieved. Then it would be available to WinXP, MacOS and Linux users as well as Vista users.
    • dracflamloc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9There is a ton of vested interest in OpenGL. PS3 and Wii use it, as would basically ANY non-MS console. The other thing to note is that DirectX as far as graphics go, offers nothing even version 10, that openGL can't use. The rendering capabilities are in the graphics chip itself and the software is just an interface to get into it. OpenGL will have plenty of time before Vista is widely adopted enough for game companies to care, and it will be easy for it to update its interface to take advantage of the graphics card.
    • shinynew, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7@osc1882
      The latest big game to use OpenGL (correct me if i am wrong) if Prey, running on the doom3 engine. this was released july, 11 this year. Thats pretty far from dead, and http://www.opengl.org/ is still posting.
    • greyfade, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8@TGMD: The OpenGL ARB (Architecture Review Board - which includes Microsoft, HP, SGI, Apple, NVIDIA, ATi, and others) has done more innovation in its first versions than DirectX has made since version 5. (We don't discuss anything prior - everyone knows DirectX was unusable before version 5.) 3DLabs' introduction of their OpenGL 2.0 proposal (we are now up to 2.1) has done everything that DirectX 8 claimed to and /then/ some.

      OpenGL's progress may seem glacial (just as EMACS users claim VIM's development is glacial at version 7, not realizing that EMACS actually still hasn't reached the big 2.0) but that's probably due to the fact that OpenGL has done most of its innovation first, before DirectX, and relies mainly on its extension mechanism to provide the features that core OpenGL didn't have the foresight for. In truth, OpenGL is collectively farther along technically than DirectX 10 is, and it has had the input in the world's leaders in 3D graphics technology (Microsoft's presence notwithstanding - they've made zero contribution to the OpenGL standard, and are often accused of slowing things down on the ARB).
    • HonoredMule, on 10/12/2007, -6/+6Call me crazy, but isn't something horribly wrong if the primary difference between two API's ISN'T one in simplicity/ease of use? Yet everyone here is whining like c programmers do that their language can do everything that .NET can. No FUD, fruity frock, but since 90%+ of game developers are using DirectX despite consequently locking themselves out of the linux and mac circles, there must be SOME reason why it's a more attractive option. And I have a few hunches.
    • palmer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Think of all the effort wasted on DirectX, which could've gone into OpenGL. Effort by Microsoft, graphics-card vendors, and app developers alike.

      Thanks, MS.
    • an0nym0us, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3You're Welcome. :)
    • HonoredMule, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What, the effort that brought developers and hardware vendors together to collaborate on the next generation of graphics capability? Or the effort that implemented an API to use that capability. OpenGL benefits from the efforts of DirectX and the other groups that participated in this collaboration...if OpenGL wanted to to be the innovator, it should put up the investment into a unified vision of the future like Microsoft has done.

      They don't get a cookie for being able to copy what Microsoft made possible. It's a sad day when brick and mortar companies do a better job of collaborating than the open source zealots...for some, at least. But I can't really say I'm surprised. No leadership = no focus/creative vision/direction/agreement = no innovation.
  • osc1882, on 10/12/2007, -8/+9Oh yes, Directx10 or.. DirectXX ?
    anyways, it's the ONLY reason why I will pirat.... pick up a copy of Vista.
  • BuckCynnie, on 10/12/2007, -3/+19Not only do you need new hardware (always a requirement) but you need a new OS. That totally sucks. I hope more game makers start using OpenGL again. I use Linux and would love to not have to boot to Windows just to play a damn game.

    :(
    • seanmac, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3Even though writing the game with OpenGL would go a long way toward portability, I still don't think the extra bit of effort to port to Linux could be justified by game studios.

      There's a couple good articles (rants) on extremetech.com about the state of gaming on Linux.
    • AngryBacon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4But using OpenGL makes it a lot easier to run in WINE.
    • doodlebumm, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7If written in OpenGL, the porting issue is really much less relevant. Yes, you must do more work to get it to work on Linux and MacOS, but it is not a significant overhead. There are plenty of games (and developers) who have made the commitment and are benefiting from it.
    • greyfade, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@seanmac: Those rants are explosive and disappointingly flame the reader base. That author needs to be kicked off the editorial team. I was drunk at the time, but even I saw through it all: http://discuss.extremetech.com/forums/4/1004353047/ShowPost.aspx#1004353487
    • erikerikerik, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2And in 20 years I bet you'll still be bitching about having to upgrade to run the newest "it"
  • theigor, on 10/12/2007, -18/+6If you are going to switch to something that wont be compatible with your old hardware you might as well go linux.
    • greyfade, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10You haven't tried it lately, have you?
  • InetRoadkill, on 10/12/2007, -9/+19Thanks, but no thanks. I'll stay with OpenGL and cross-platform compatibility.
    • seanmac, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11Please define the context of your comment. If you're a gamer you don't really have a choice -- most games will run only on one API or the other, and that's almost always Directx.

      If you are a developer, then your comment is slightly more relevant, but not really because you will use whatever API your manager tells you to use. And it's kind of hard to advocate cross compatibility when directx is cross-compatible with something that's a bit more relevant than *nix -- the Xbox.

      If you develop applications for industrial use then of course you're going to stick with opengl

      So that leaves demo writer. In which case no one cares.
    • Loonacy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6"And it's kind of hard to advocate cross compatibility when directx is cross-compatible with something that's a bit more relevant than *nix -- the Xbox."

      And OpenGL is cross-compatible with something that's a bit more relevant than the Xbox -- The PS2/3 (And there are a lot more PS2s out there than there are Xbox/X360s).

      And you also left out the possibility that he might just be a manager of developers.
    • InetRoadkill, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7The context is as a developer and user. OpenGL is a very mature and open standard. It has cross-platform compatibility. Plus, unlike DX10, it will never demand that I shell out $$$ for a new OS to use it.

      Any games which fail to support DX9 or OpenGL are shooting themselves in the foot by limiting their potential client base. It appears that DX10 will only be available to Vista. Games which use DX10 exclusively will be a Vista only games. Thanks, but no thanks. I'm not purchasing Vista, and there is every reason to believe that Vista is not going to be a big hit for home users either (nasty DRM and licensing issues, plus it's a resource pig). Therefore, as a developer, I'm inclined to avoid DX10 because I want to have as broad an audience as possible. OpenGL does that for me.
    • greyfade, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Indeed, one can use OpenGL on Macs, Linux, Big Iron Unix (Read: SGI IRIX), all but 2 of the major consoles (XBox and XBox 360 being the notable exceptions unless someone knows whether an OpenGL API is available?), Windows, some handheld systems, and cell phones (with EGL and OpenML).... Whereas DirectX is only available on Windows and the XBoxes - and DirectX 10 only on Windows Vista.

      DirectX 10 sounds like marketing suicide to me.

      (Also, I should probably note that DirectX is popular among demo writers because it can be so slim in recent incarnations - it's a lot easier to write a 64KB demo on DirectX than on OpenGL, I'll admit.)
    • Ademan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@seanmac

      What are you talking about? Most sane developer's write their 3d code around an abstraction layer which has a Direct3D or OpenGL backend, though admittedly that trend does seem to be fading, as microsoft continues to push their proprietary crap on everyone. (Although I attribute the majority of Direct3D adoption to D3DX (a set of helper functions for everything from 3d transformations to model loading) )

      And i've stressed this time and time again. DirectX and OpenGL are ONLY INTERFACES TO HARDWARE. Direct Sound interfaces a sound card, Direct3D and OpenGL interface graphics cards, and so on. It's not like Direct3D "makes" any effects, it simply exposes the functionality to a program. Having said that, OpenGL exposes new effects in a much better way, without breaking the entire API every iteration.

      OpenGL has broken backwards compatibility once in its 13 year run. Direct3D has broken it's API every single iteration since i've used it (Dx7)

      Having said that, OpenGL is going to break its API a second time jumping from OpenGL 2.1 to OpenGL 3.0 They are totally changing the object model. This is actually a GOOD thing, as opposed to Direct3D's changes which mostly consist of an extra parameter or two and renaming a function, basically a refactoring nightmare.

      OpenGL 3.0 promises geometry shaders, longer vertex and fragment(pixel) shaders.

      And several things Direct3D 10 doesnt have, namely superbuffers, which will allow batching of epic proportions. Render to vertex BUFFER. among other things.

      Long story short:
      OpenGL 3.0 > DirectX 10 based on features alone
      Direct X 10 > OpenGL 3.0 on support
      winner = ?

      Who knows, with all of the exciting OpenGL 3.0 features, more and more people might switch (back) over to openGL.
  • tastypastry, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5Well I look forward to building my new gaming PC mid 2007. Its going to be a great in the coming years for PC gamers.
  • OpCzar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Can the xbox360 even use directx10? If not, then most ports will be playable on directx9...
    • DigitalDud, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3No, D3D 10 hardware didn't even exist as prototypes until a few months ago.
  • malkir, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4There's going to be a good 3-5 year time lapse before any gaming studios publish any good DX10 games.
    • Pigeon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Crysis is coming out in 2007 isn't it? Thats DirectX 10.
    • mitrovarr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3As I understand it, the way it's going to work is that new games will be DirectX10 compatible, but will still work on DirectX9. So, if you don't have vista and/or a dx10 card, you can still run the game, you just lose out on the dx10 specific features (which improve performance and graphical quality.)

    • malkir, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Perhaps I should have clarified. There will be no good DX10 only titles. They will all also use DX9.
    • DigitalDud, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2FSX supports Direct3D 10 (with a soon to be published update) and the game itself is out now. =)
  • greenrider, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Is there some obligatory rule that says any article about a videocard or display technology must be split up into no less than 6 pages?

    Aside from that, good article.
  • rado354, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1I still hope they will release DirectX 10 for WinXP

    http://addons.wordpress.com/
    • greyfade, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5They won't. The drastic change in driver architecture probably means they've broken several crucial parts of the driver ABI between Windows NT/2K/XP and Vista. While you can still use NT4 drivers on XP, I don't expect the same to be true for Vista. Given that the new parts of the driver ABI for Vista allow for an interface for DirectX 10, I expect Microsoft to stick with their decision.

      If you don't know what an ABI is, it's the specification that says "these functions are here in memory and nowhere else, this is how you call them, and this is how you handle the context switch to ring 0 so they can be called." Everything breaks if you change even one byte in the ABI. (This is why complete binary drivers generally don't exist on Linux - the ABI is always in flux - deliberately so.)
    • Ademan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Well Microsoft is FINALLY fixing a retarded ass design decision involving a user space to kernel space switch on draw calls. This is why DirectX had to have instancing implemented, because at small batch sizes, DirectX performed like a grandma on sleeping pills. OpenGL on the other hand never suffered that problem. On the other hand, OpenGL still doesn't have instancing. (it will in openGL 3.0)
  • bcardarella, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I'm a big fan of my XBox360 but I think Microsoft really messed up by not incorporating DX10 into the 360. I understand the the 360 came out over a year ago and Vista is just now coming out but DX10 has been in developers hands for months now. At the very least they could have based the hardware on expecting to finish up DX10 then doing a firmware upgrade in the future. Imagine that, MS upgrades the XBox360 to DX10 days before the PS3 comes out, that would have been huge.
    • HonoredMule, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Just because the specification was out doesn't mean the implementation was. Yes developers have been able to work with the API in their development environments, but that doesn't mean their computers had DX10 hardware, now did it? Case in point for the Xbox
  • SSCrow, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1I'm sure the Xbox 360 will receive an update that will allow for Directx 10 compatibility.
    Although I'm pretty sure teh XBox 360 has its own API.
    • kn0w1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1But what if you make a game that uses DX10 and the Xbox360 it's going in hasn't been updated (or even has an Xbox Live account) ?
      Console games need to run "out of the box" (whether that box is the console or the game ..)

      But maybe they could do like PSP games and do some version check before running and have the software on the disc to update if needed? (Just speculating as i don't know how Xbox 360 games boot, etc.)
    • Pigeon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The 360 uses DirectX, Managed DirectX and the.Net APIs.
    • MiDri, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1They will do what they did with xbox games, there are a few demos out that that actually update your dash board (and us soft modders have to look out for them, they'll screw up our mods)
    • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1[quote]The 360 uses DirectX, Managed DirectX and the.Net APIs.[/quote]

      DX, but not DX10.
  • Pigeon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3The new features provided by the 8800 are already available to use in OpenGL, you just need an updated header and the beta drivers. The DirectX 10 component of the drivers isn't ready yet, will be soon.
    • mitrovarr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Are there any programs that really use them, though? I mean, aside from simply benefiting from the speed of the 8800s.
    • HonoredMule, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Why do online services and "Web 2.0" gadgetry get constantly slammed for its perpetual "beta-ness" while open source ventures get praised for having features "in the works" in their beta versions?

      In the real world, people don't wait for apparitions of alternatives just because they don't like the "corporate-ness" of proven solutions available now. Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with OpenGL. The thing is...there's nothing wrong with DirectX either.

      Just make sure you aren't anti-Microsoft *just* because they hold market leadership. Innovation simply doesn't happen without strong leadership.
    • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1There will be soon. And they won't need DX10 or Vista!
  • gerkin, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6The future of gaming according to MicroSoft:

    1. Thou shalt have no other API before me
    2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any compatible API
    3. Thou shall not take the name of our API in vain
    4. Remember patch Tuesday, keep it busy
    5. Honour Bill Gates and Microsoft
    6. Thou shalt not uninstall
    7. Thou shalt not play OpenGL games
    8. Thou shalt not reverse engineer
    9. Thou shalt not offer "Application Compatability" to thy neighbour
    10. Thou shalt not ask for OpenGL compatability
  • exoir, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5In those PC guy vs Mac guy commercials, they should show the PC guys hot girlfriend "DirectX". Of course the mac is guy doesn't have a girlfriend because...well you know what they say about macs and "lifestyle choices".

  • lucas448, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1good thing i just got that 512 graphics card :) now for ram...
  • MrViklund, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1Great article.
  • MrViklund, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1Great article.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.