Marvel G550-TV???

[AndrewDV]

Hi,

The heat seems to be building here over the speculation about Win2K vid tools. Given that, let me through some gas into the fire. I was wondering, is it possible that Matrox is going to announce a new hardware-based capture card for home users? Could there be a Marvel G550-TV in the works?

Granted, I'm shotting at the moon with that statement. At this point, I'm hoping for some more than "eat dirt" from Matrox.

Thanks

[This_Idiot]

I think that the days of Matrox graphics section producing hardware compressed capture cards are gone. After all, why bother now they've got the software side of it cracked. They make the same markup for the video product over the non-video but all they have to do is solder some extra connectors and use the software codecs. In the past, the problem has always been the availability of CPUs hot enough to perform realtime compression, but the last year has seen these become common property, not even on the fringe !

Nope, the hardware is going to become the playground of the perfectionists, and Matrox will be dealing with this through their dedicated video subsidiary (who currently look after digisuite, RT2000, RT2500 etc).

[wkulecz]

I'd just about overcome my adversion to Premiere6 enough to buy an RT2500 with my tax refund.

Now I won't. No point risking gettin stuck with another orphan board in 6 months when XP is released.

--wally.

[Dr Mordrid]

I think XP drivers can be expected for the RT-2x00 boards as soon as Matrox has a near-final version of XP from Microsoft to work with, and that's a ways off. XP is still a moving target....

Still, they have working Win2K drivers, so the kernel issues have already been solved.

Dr. Mordrid


[This message has been edited by Dr Mordrid (edited 30 May 2001).]

[Ant]

I'm certain we'll see something like a Marvel G550 eTV but it will be software based, you will not see another hardware solution from Matrox Graphics.

[Flying dutchman]

I am running out of reasons to stick with Matrox. I can get WORKING software video compression and FASTER 3-d for less money from other companies. Even the picture quality is better (Geforce cards from Asus and Elsa have a stunning image quality).

[IM_Riktar]

Sorry Doc on this one i strongly disagree with your comment.

While I am not the most technically savy person I do have a memory and seem to recall a post from you sometime back that mentioned W2k was a moving target as well when driver issues were in question for some other Matrox products. Is history as well as your rationale repeating itself?

Let Matrox make up their own excuses.

All sarcasm aside, thanks for the effort you have put into this board by way of posts. And while I am at it thank you Chris for all the efforts you have put into this. Haig you aint so bad either. It's the marketing/executive end of your company I am directing my frustration at.

[mikiem]

Stuff I'm wondering right now is:

1) Did/does Matrox have the resources *if* they decided to use them, to codevelope new drivers and their new matrox.dv site?

The timing could just be inconvenient, or they could be like some other companies that here shall remain nameless.

2) WDM drivers were an issue in the windows world years ago, especially re: video. Matrox sold the g400TV into this year I believe, supplying the video tools app & drivers that seem barely retooled versions of much older RR code, parts of that developed by talent outside of Matrox if I remember my cruising thru their dlls correctly. At any rate, wdm drivers were available even for my old IX Micro card before they went under.

That said, I have to wonder that Matrox ever intended something they couldn't achieve while the card was in production? I would however have expected something to counter the many, many problems like DX8 issues many of us have endured solely because new drivers were promised.

3) I wonder about just where Matrox is heading, & yes this is a valid question. Are they going to focus on the RT market segment, get their skills built up for something ala metacreations etc.?

Just because they had decent support -- they'd talk to you unlike many others -- doesn't mean it's forever; maybe we should look at them the same way one does Diamond, or feel the same outrage many VooDoo owners feel nowdays?

4) We have all put up with a bit simply because new drivers were coming. Also, we bought hardware compression with costs in hard cash and performance -- we could have bought much cheaper TV cards and more capable graphics cards to start with.

Why should it be assumed that we will be happy giving up hardware compression, meaning we will have very expensive TV cards & that's it?

What would happen if we began requesting support, rma's, for all the problems we've put up with while we were waiting?

I for one am no longer willing to put up with even occassional problems just booting my system.... that sort of thing.

Maybe that's the key? If issues are forced to their attention, if support has to deal with all sorts of requests for rma's, all from the perspective of the card's broke, not from the point of view: *this is just the nature of the beast while we wait patiently*...

I mean if you think about it, Matrox has gotten away with murder, pacifying owners with promises.

[Elie]

Win2K is a dying OS, as soon as XP is released people will start jumping ship due to it's flexibility.
XP will even allow you to run apps in Win98 mode if the app itself is not compatible with the latest kernel, now that's an improvement.

I have eTV, RT2000 and RT2500 and I have every faith in Matrox to develop drivers/software for XP.

Elie

[Dr Mordrid]

At the time I wrote that "moving target" Win2K post it WAS a moving target and some time away from release. XP is now in a similar position with Microsoft delaying release AGAIN, this time until Q3 (at least).

How do you write drivers for an OS that isn't in a final state and is still to this day being modified at a core level?

As for failure to produce Win2K drivers I suggest you talk to M$ and Zoran about why;

1. MicroCrap hasn't fixed the Win2K WDM-to-VfW translation layer so existing WfW analog capture drivers could be used. Otherwise you have to rewrite the whole shebang to DirectShow and still might not be able to get them to work because of #2;

2. Zoran hasn't supplied a Win2K DirectShow SDK for their chipsets. Without that you have to reverse engineer the whole thing.

Of course such lack of support isnt' uncommon with Zoran. Anyone remember their defunct DVD player that came with the Marvel G200 and how much trouble that caused?

Dr. Mordrid

[Ansigod]

That's nice an all Doc, but if hardware MJPEG is the only reason for waiting THIS LONG to release working drivers (not just VTs), then why haven't Matrox released other Win2k fixes for the Marvel series in the meantime?


I was elated when I learned that Drivers for Win2k had been written to fix the DualHead bug under Win2k! I thought it was a great victory for Matrox's team. But drivers were never released for the Marvel cards to address this problem. Nor were there drivers released to address the YUY2 problem under Win2k.


It seems to me that Matrox has let these problems pile up on the Marvel owners and is only using this MJPEG issue as a smokescreen.


[edit] Doc, please don't take offense to the tone at the top of this post. I have VERY much respect for you, and you've helped me out in the pase. I've just got my panties in a wad it seems.

[This message has been edited by Ansigod (edited 31 May 2001).]

[wkulecz]

Sorry, history won't repeat for me. I'm not buying. This way I won't have to worry about Matrox whinning that C-Cube is not supporting Microsoft's next moving target OS.

Once burnt, twice shy.

--wally.

[wkulecz]

Eh Doc, I was *expecting* W2K drivers for my G200 Marvel because: "as soon as Matrox has a near-final version of XP from Microsoft to work with, and that's a ways off. XP is still a moving target...." substitute W2K for XP in your quote. G200 display drivers were in the w2k beta I had at that time. If I had the slightest doubt the G200 Marvel would never see working w2k drivers I'd never have bought it.

I won't go there again.

--wally.