a slower release cycle does not mean that there will be bigger jumps per release. Mostly it means that they will charge more for the next gen so that they can generate the same amount of money they would make providing more frequent upgrades.
as far as I know, intel has completely stopped creating video chipsets. They have also cancelled every projects for an all-in-one cpu/chipset that I know of. They also are the only company I've seen who managed to push worse drivers than ATi's
Their main problem appeared to be management focusing on getting faster revisions of old technology out rather than letting their engineers reinvent the architecture.
They bought STB based on their strong branding (apparently they were very branding-oriented, like Intel), but unfortunately lost the majority of their sales outlets due to this, as well as direction due to management of two different companies.
Because of my belief that they kept taking engineers off of next-gen projects (Rampage, anyone?) and putting them on feature-adding revisions of the Voodoo I, I would imagine that NVidia is inheiriting a *lot* of new technology with this deal which we haven't seen yet
Actually, with closed source drivers, you are usually guaranteed it will get worse.
What if Nvidia decided they would not support the 2.4 kernel? glibc versions >2.2? Xfree 4.1? With closed source drivers, all work comes from paid employees - think of it not as them deciding NOT to support these, but deciding not to expand their support to these new technologies.
If I want to try BSD/Hurd, as far as I know I am up sh*t creek as far as support with an NVidia board. Same with trying to get it working under LinuxPPC.
With closed-source drivers, every new technology amounts to 'expand support budget, eliminate support for old technology, or ignore'. With open-source drivers, at least people who want say, their Riva 128 to work with new drivers actually *can* implement the support.
Actually, the Linux kernel is pretty good about not making components depend on 'non-published' APIs too much. Most of the benefit I have seen from the linux kernel architecture comes from components not needing to talk through kernel components to other components (yay, ten context switches for a fork()).
There are two main reasons the kernel doesn't support 'standard mappings' of interfaces for drivers. First, it destroys the possibility of change. Even in the current kernel, old interfaces stay around way too long. Second, many fear it will promote binary drivers. Since there is no company which maintains all of the kernel, binary drivers provide a substantial disadvantage to the linux kernel (the architecture group can't examine or port drivers, because they do not have access to the source code or the hardware workings). A standard interface only promotes that: the current setup is that when a kernel interface changes, it is not their problem, and the third party company needs to update their code to match. Look around for quotes from the main kernel developers about them wanting binary-only module maintainers to 'wake up in a cold sweat every once in a while'
1. the Q3A for linux wasn't available for nearly two weeks after the windows version. This made the difference between 'before XMas' and 'after XMas' sales, as far as I know.
2. I had to *hunt* hard to find the linux version. I finally found it in the fifth store I looked. They had one copy, and I have never, ever seen another copy in any computer store I've been to since.
3. Linux didn't have 3d support when they released a 3d-only game for it. No NVidia drivers, no ATi drivers, pre-beta G400 drivers (A year later there still hasn't been a release of these drivers), and voodoo drivers that required upgrading XFree to version 4, manually. Why would I buy a game for Linux when it doesn't work in Linux? Why would I risk wasting my money when I can just dual-boot and play in windows like normal?
Sure, sales were disappointing. But of course - being weeks late with the release, not having any hardware support whatsoever and not actually selling the software publically just *may* have attributed to this.
The basic line? I would have preferred to have never had a linux retail version. I had to wait until the point release due to a bug in the utah-glx G400 drivers. At least if they hadn't done this 'experiment' I would have been able to play in Windows before the point release. And we wouldn't have people taking iD's totally half-assed effort and thinking it applies to all shrink-wrapped software that exists or ever could exist for Linux.
You do realize that the reason that it is called 'BogoMIPS' is that it is a bogus measure of system or processor speed. It is only used for internal timing.
Crusoe processors are only available in BGA. When you consider the smaller size and pins over the entire chip rather than just the perimeter, I doubt it is that much larger.
Of course, SA's are probably available in BGA as well. I'm kinda surprised that they could get by with just 144 pins on one.
Re:3D Realism is becoming dangerous.
on
Nvidia's NV20
·
· Score: 1
Office 95, 98, 2000. The way I see it, if they divide the price into less than half, they are ripping themselves off.
Presently Office is included in many PCs sold - this would become a 'free for the first year, $20/month thereafter' (price negotiable.) Rather than trying to convince people to upgrade via new features, they instead get paid the exact same amount whether or not any new features or bugfixes come in.
even better - even at 60 fps,
the thing would need a 558 MHz pixel refresh. It would seem like your only *hope* would be to download four pixels at once to the thing - which would require 128 pins if digital, just for color data (no clocks):)
Even then, the card would be fetching data as fast as the clock rate on some of the cards (@140 million fetches a second)
A 1 Gigapixel 3d accel would not be able to keep up a 60 Hz framerate with two passes on, and would barely be able to keep up single pass (assuming a 'simple' 50% overdraw). You would need something around 3 Gigapixel to really have the card be usable for most current games. You would also need either some super-expensive ram or a 256-bit data path to keep up (and 256 pins just for a data bus is more than most people can handle on a chip)
Across four machines (two being gateways and one being a Dell), I've never had a Win2k box stay up for more than six hours without destroying itself. Driver conflicts, twice the 'defrag' utility corrupted the FAT32 drive. Once I actually managed to get a program installed (WinZip) before it died. Another time it died the second I downloaded and played an AVI. Some driver bug in the i740 stuff. After which the drivers had corrupted themselves on the FAT32 drive.
Do not discount other people's experiences because you've had luck, just as I don't discount your experience just because you haven't had problems. With completely stock off-the-CD drivers I've had it self destruct on four machines, and seen it run perfect without a crash for four months on a fifth.
All I'm saying is, my odds have been much better with Linux;-)
Oh come off it, IE for Windows isn't even compliant with the standards Microsoft originally *proposed* to the W3C!
You want to cry, go try IE for Mac, the closest thing to a truely standards-compliant browser. After using it for an hour you'll wonder how the same company could have put out both (except for the icon sets and registered trademarks attached).
First - chances are if you are too outright critical of D.A.R.E, your article will be censored.
Second, I think the entire War on Drugs has been a failure in the worst way, but especially 'education' programs like D.A.R.E. Why? They don't educate, they preach fear. "Don't Do Drugs" - rather than teach the harms of drugs, perhaps giving examples - perhaps even finding people who have been through rehab to come in and talk, they preach fear, just a blanket of "Don't Do Drugs".
At least *I* never received any actual facts about drug usage, side effects, anything. Just that they were 'bad', or even sometimes 'uncool' (laughable, my teacher telling me what is hip).
The reason I find this hilarious is that the commercials nowdays urge parents to tell their kids about the harms of drugs, and guess what - I DON'T KNOW. I know that someone told me they were bad, preached it day after day, because that was part of their job. People do the same thing in bleach commercials on television, but at least *there* they offer something better.
So I say, if you want to make this program effective, really *Educate* people. Bring in ex-herion and cocaine addicts, ones that can talk better than Crackhead Bob, and have them educate the students. As a plus, you can pick from many Major League Baseball players. You will probably not find any ex-marijuana addicts, but hey, maybe you can keep people away from the really heavy and aweful drugs like speed and herion.
But don't ask me to educate my kids, because all I have to give to them is fear and slogans, and I won't do it (when I have kids).
If AOL was a small company, I'd look at this and laugh. But with the Time/Warner deal heading up soon, it is very possible that all of Time/Warner's present and future subscribers will be AOL users.
They are forcing content on a lot of users, who will soon probably not have a real alternative to opt-out.
The patents aren't global to multitexturing, they cover the specific way that mutitexturing units (texelfx) can be chained to apply n textures to one surface.
Plus, although NVidia may have been on the ARB before 3Dfx, 3Dfx has Gary Tarolli, who pretty much invented OpenGL:)
You do realize that labels 'loan' the money to make these recordings, they do not 'give' it. The only thing that comes close to a benefit to a contract with a recording label is nationwide/international distribution, and advertising. Everything else (and I mean *everything*) is just a raping.
Internet == free distribution, and to an extent, free advertising.
The laser has more mass than a disk though - how would this save power?
Perhaps you should be considering a mechanism below the CD which is basically a rotating mirror. The problem is the dimensions of this mechanism would make it *really* hard to construct in a non-flimsy manner.
Standardization will get really far when applications for different distributions are not binary compatible due to differences in gcc and glibc (*staring* at redhat)
Slashdot Mirror
a slower release cycle does not mean that there will be bigger jumps per release. Mostly it means that they will charge more for the next gen so that they can generate the same amount of money they would make providing more frequent upgrades.
G400 is also dirt old. What ever happened to the G800? There aren't even mentions of it on their site or on any gaming sites.
as far as I know, intel has completely stopped creating video chipsets. They have also cancelled every projects for an all-in-one cpu/chipset that I know of. They also are the only company I've seen who managed to push worse drivers than ATi's
Their main problem appeared to be management focusing on getting faster revisions of old technology out rather than letting their engineers reinvent the architecture.
They bought STB based on their strong branding (apparently they were very branding-oriented, like Intel), but unfortunately lost the majority of their sales outlets due to this, as well as direction due to management of two different companies.
Because of my belief that they kept taking engineers off of next-gen projects (Rampage, anyone?) and putting them on feature-adding revisions of the Voodoo I, I would imagine that NVidia is inheiriting a *lot* of new technology with this deal which we haven't seen yet
Actually, with closed source drivers, you are usually guaranteed it will get worse.
What if Nvidia decided they would not support the 2.4 kernel? glibc versions >2.2? Xfree 4.1? With closed source drivers, all work comes from paid employees - think of it not as them deciding NOT to support these, but deciding not to expand their support to these new technologies.
If I want to try BSD/Hurd, as far as I know I am up sh*t creek as far as support with an NVidia board. Same with trying to get it working under LinuxPPC.
With closed-source drivers, every new technology amounts to 'expand support budget, eliminate support for old technology, or ignore'. With open-source drivers, at least people who want say, their Riva 128 to work with new drivers actually *can* implement the support.
Actually, the Linux kernel is pretty good about not making components depend on 'non-published' APIs too much. Most of the benefit I have seen from the linux kernel architecture comes from components not needing to talk through kernel components to other components (yay, ten context switches for a fork()).
There are two main reasons the kernel doesn't support 'standard mappings' of interfaces for drivers. First, it destroys the possibility of change. Even in the current kernel, old interfaces stay around way too long. Second, many fear it will promote binary drivers. Since there is no company which maintains all of the kernel, binary drivers provide a substantial disadvantage to the linux kernel (the architecture group can't examine or port drivers, because they do not have access to the source code or the hardware workings). A standard interface only promotes that: the current setup is that when a kernel interface changes, it is not their problem, and the third party company needs to update their code to match. Look around for quotes from the main kernel developers about them wanting binary-only module maintainers to 'wake up in a cold sweat every once in a while'
1. the Q3A for linux wasn't available for nearly two weeks after the windows version. This made the difference between 'before XMas' and 'after XMas' sales, as far as I know.
2. I had to *hunt* hard to find the linux version. I finally found it in the fifth store I looked. They had one copy, and I have never, ever seen another copy in any computer store I've been to since.
3. Linux didn't have 3d support when they released a 3d-only game for it. No NVidia drivers, no ATi drivers, pre-beta G400 drivers (A year later there still hasn't been a release of these drivers), and voodoo drivers that required upgrading XFree to version 4, manually. Why would I buy a game for Linux when it doesn't work in Linux? Why would I risk wasting my money when I can just dual-boot and play in windows like normal?
Sure, sales were disappointing. But of course - being weeks late with the release, not having any hardware support whatsoever and not actually selling the software publically just *may* have attributed to this.
The basic line? I would have preferred to have never had a linux retail version. I had to wait until the point release due to a bug in the utah-glx G400 drivers. At least if they hadn't done this 'experiment' I would have been able to play in Windows before the point release. And we wouldn't have people taking iD's totally half-assed effort and thinking it applies to all shrink-wrapped software that exists or ever could exist for Linux.
You do realize that the reason that it is called 'BogoMIPS' is that it is a bogus measure of system or processor speed. It is only used for internal timing.
Crusoe processors are only available in BGA. When you consider the smaller size and pins over the entire chip rather than just the perimeter, I doubt it is that much larger.
Of course, SA's are probably available in BGA as well. I'm kinda surprised that they could get by with just 144 pins on one.
well you are the most stupidest!!
Office 95, 98, 2000. The way I see it, if they divide the price into less than half, they are ripping themselves off.
Presently Office is included in many PCs sold - this would become a 'free for the first year, $20/month thereafter' (price negotiable.) Rather than trying to convince people to upgrade via new features, they instead get paid the exact same amount whether or not any new features or bugfixes come in.
strong words from an anonymous troll.
but these aren't people, they are companies. This is also not a criminal case.
actually, neither of those were real words :)
even better - even at 60 fps, :)
:)
the thing would need a 558 MHz pixel refresh. It would seem like your only *hope* would be to download four pixels at once to the thing - which would require 128 pins if digital, just for color data (no clocks)
Even then, the card would be fetching data as fast as the clock rate on some of the cards (@140 million fetches a second)
A 1 Gigapixel 3d accel would not be able to keep up a 60 Hz framerate with two passes on, and would barely be able to keep up single pass (assuming a 'simple' 50% overdraw). You would need something around 3 Gigapixel to really have the card be usable for most current games. You would also need either some super-expensive ram or a 256-bit data path to keep up (and 256 pins just for a data bus is more than most people can handle on a chip)
fun fun fun
watch as 60% of the programs break because of the dumb way fonts work under windows.
Across four machines (two being gateways and one being a Dell), I've never had a Win2k box stay up for more than six hours without destroying itself. Driver conflicts, twice the 'defrag' utility corrupted the FAT32 drive. Once I actually managed to get a program installed (WinZip) before it died. Another time it died the second I downloaded and played an AVI. Some driver bug in the i740 stuff. After which the drivers had corrupted themselves on the FAT32 drive.
;-)
Do not discount other people's experiences because you've had luck, just as I don't discount your experience just because you haven't had problems. With completely stock off-the-CD drivers I've had it self destruct on four machines, and seen it run perfect without a crash for four months on a fifth.
All I'm saying is, my odds have been much better with Linux
Oh come off it, IE for Windows isn't even compliant with the standards Microsoft originally *proposed* to the W3C!
You want to cry, go try IE for Mac, the closest thing to a truely standards-compliant browser. After using it for an hour you'll wonder how the same company could have put out both (except for the icon sets and registered trademarks attached).
Why was netscape included at all then?
seriuously, why?
First - chances are if you are too outright critical of D.A.R.E, your article will be censored.
Second, I think the entire War on Drugs has been a failure in the worst way, but especially 'education' programs like D.A.R.E. Why? They don't educate, they preach fear. "Don't Do Drugs" - rather than teach the harms of drugs, perhaps giving examples - perhaps even finding people who have been through rehab to come in and talk, they preach fear, just a blanket of "Don't Do Drugs".
At least *I* never received any actual facts about drug usage, side effects, anything. Just that they were 'bad', or even sometimes 'uncool' (laughable, my teacher telling me what is hip).
The reason I find this hilarious is that the commercials nowdays urge parents to tell their kids about the harms of drugs, and guess what - I DON'T KNOW. I know that someone told me they were bad, preached it day after day, because that was part of their job. People do the same thing in bleach commercials on television, but at least *there* they offer something better.
So I say, if you want to make this program effective, really *Educate* people. Bring in ex-herion and cocaine addicts, ones that can talk better than Crackhead Bob, and have them educate the students. As a plus, you can pick from many Major League Baseball players. You will probably not find any ex-marijuana addicts, but hey, maybe you can keep people away from the really heavy and aweful drugs like speed and herion.
But don't ask me to educate my kids, because all I have to give to them is fear and slogans, and I won't do it (when I have kids).
If AOL was a small company, I'd look at this and laugh. But with the Time/Warner deal heading up soon, it is very possible that all of Time/Warner's present and future subscribers will be AOL users.
They are forcing content on a lot of users, who will soon probably not have a real alternative to opt-out.
The patents aren't global to multitexturing, they cover the specific way that mutitexturing units (texelfx) can be chained to apply n textures to one surface.
:)
Plus, although NVidia may have been on the ARB before 3Dfx, 3Dfx has Gary Tarolli, who pretty much invented OpenGL
You do realize that labels 'loan' the money to make these recordings, they do not 'give' it. The only thing that comes close to a benefit to a contract with a recording label is nationwide/international distribution, and advertising. Everything else (and I mean *everything*) is just a raping.
Internet == free distribution, and to an extent, free advertising.
The laser has more mass than a disk though - how would this save power?
Perhaps you should be considering a mechanism below the CD which is basically a rotating mirror. The problem is the dimensions of this mechanism would make it *really* hard to construct in a non-flimsy manner.
Standardization will get really far when applications for different distributions are not binary compatible due to differences in gcc and glibc (*staring* at redhat)