little poll question

[wkulecz]

Harald,
Going straight to DV has a lot to offer. Its pretty much what I do now using the AVin->DVout "pass-thru" feature of my D8 Sony TRV-120. Main thing that's missing is the "VCR-like" timed recording features, although I imagine one could cobble something together with windows scripting, although controlling a tuner could be a problem (www.X10.com has some Computer-to-RF-to-IR gadgets that might help and aren't too pricey). For now I record Battlebots on my SVHS VCR, latter capture it to DV, and encode to VCD with TMPGEnc. VCD quality is at least about equal to VHS SLP. I've had doezens of people standing around, drinking beer at the computer monitor watching my Battlebots clips -- most just assumed it was a TV and VCR.

I'd get the Sony DVMC-DA2 over the Dazzle Hollywood Bridge -- too many problem reports with the Dazzle on DV to analog out. Few complaints about the DVMC and the cost is only about $20 more for the Sony box ($320 in the latest B&H catalog).

Doc,
I'd be happy if my $300 G200 Marvel could do what my $50 Hauppauge card does under W2k with VfW -- it'd be better than the nothing it does now and at least buy me a PCI slot.

--wally.

[Dr Mordrid]

RGB didn't get used much because YUY2 could be captured at lower data rates (20 mb/s vs 27+ mb/s).

For the record: you can capture to both HuffYUV and PICVideo MJPeg with RGB as the capture format. It's a bit more CPU intensive than YUY2, but it's doable with Durons, Athlons, CeleronII's and PIII's.

Dr. Mordrid

[hapz]

wally,

That's where I originally got stuck and hoped that matrox will come through. Well, they sc@#$ed us dearly....

Sony was not willing to commit to anything, i.e. they did not give advise on which card/software works with their DA converter, particularly playing back the finished DV product to analog tape. That's when I "detected" the Hollywood DV which seemd to do the same job, only cheaper. At the time, several months ago, I did not find any complaints about this Dazzle product.

What I have not yet digested fully and why I am still hesitating, DV only provides 4:1:1. I.e., converting from SVHS to DV the result would look washed out?


------------------
Harald

[coolfish]

"Coolfish, Matrox also was told by M$ that certain bugs would be resolved in an SP update. Then they doubled back on their word to you, me and the rest of the entire planet. Pull your head out and smell the roses. " Greebe

Greebe don't be silly. Relying on MS to fix their bugs is ridiculous. That should have also been included in a risk assessment. You add that up with the Zoran problem, and only an IDIOT would think that there would be even a chance of pulling out fully functionable Win2k drivers/tools.

Doc, same thing applies to your response. "Seeing the future" is a part of what a systems analyst has to do. Seeing how Win2k was available for beta development 2 years ago, Matrox should have been able to foresee Zoran couldn't get their stuff goin in win2k easily. You can't depend on another developer to fix their bugs, ESPECIALLY one as unreliable as MS.

Smell the roses? Nah, I think I'll just stay in school and learn how _GOOD_ software should be developped, and how to avoid messes like Matrox is in.

Coolfish.


[This message has been edited by coolfish (edited 01 June 2001).]

[Christrati]

Just my two cents here:

-First, pros about the Matrox announcement:

Although many of us are disappointed with the Win2k decision and still fight bugs with the current software, Matrox has just decided to put an end to any hope and speculation of a card which would last for years. Most products in the computer industry do not last throughout all OS upgrades, some adapt to give basic functions while other will not function at all! In a way, Matrox forced a bad rap on themselves by letting people believe they were going to develop something in which they had no intent of supporting. Other hardware manufacturers usually tell their customer to "stick with the supported OS" but at least you do not have any hope of a future upgrade. The most frustrating factor is the year+ wait and all the hope and faith building on the fact these hardware cards would work in Win2k. The big bonuses for Matrox are:
1. Less calls to tech support with issues on the unsupported drivers
2. Focus spent more on newer card developments
3. A big lesson learned about product development and support

Now for the Cons of this "betrayal":
-RGB for G200/RRG owners? All I have to say is RWB (Red, White and Blue) of America guys! That's the whole point of capitalism, make a product, which the public will adobt and love while making the most profit. But usually, at least in the past, many successful companies are still around because they supported what they sold and went beyond everyone's expectation! Not to mention once you piss off your consumers, you're sunk in the water.

The biggest problem with the whole new "driver" support is the speculation that the Win9x/ME drivers will be rendered with the restricted feature--RGB (again, RWB of American consumers will prevail here!). This is crap! RGB uses way too much CPU power for any useable capture!

Now a bigger problem with Matrox's newer capture card. Sure they have high end capture devices, which might be better quality and have great software with them, but the main fact remains: I want to do simple video capture of TV content (i.e. replace my VCR), archive old video tapes (not possible right now via Marvel G450 eTV), and be able to do those two main points in Win2k (the third idea not available for Marvel G450 owners yet!).

IMHO, I believe Matrox took a Marvel G400 card, slapped on the G450 chipset, put on the basic video capture board, and used the same Beta drivers they had for their previous cards! Right now, in Win2k, this card is useless to me! No video capture above 352x240 unless I want to deal with field issues. What kind of crap is that! After bugging tech support about it, I'm told it's more then a "registry" problem and I would have to wait until the next driver release, which won't be until their new capture card comes out. Well, sorry Matrox, but right now, I'm stuck with a card that only work in Win ME right now.

As for future buys, I will remember the classic idea/thought many great figures have told me as I grew up, "Get burned once then it's their fault, get burned twice, that's your(my) fault." In the future, I would prefer to "be paid" rather then "pay" for a Beta Marvel card. I was burned once by ATI with their All-in-Wonder (which now looks and IMHO, is probably better then the Marvel G450) and should have learned from my previous endeavors.

For all future Matrox and Video Capture buyers in the future, some idea's to keep in mind when buying your next card:
1. Never buy a newly released card, as you'll probably end up finding a bunch of bugs, which you'll have to wait and waste time fixing.
2. Research the card's supported OS(es) and remember the fact that you might be restricted to this OS completely.
3. Test the support behind the product before buying; this will also save you from keeping a crappy card especially if the response time is bad (my experience with ATI in the past.)
4. Don't be the leader in video capturing, wait for 5-10 reliable reviews and research any issues other people have had. (Again, research before you buy!).

Well, enough of my rant about the whole "Matrox" deal. Unless Matrox comes out with a new product offering great high-resolution capture and DVD quality archival codecs for Win2k, this company will not be in my checkbook in the future.

Chris

[chm]

YUY2 support is *not* provided for RR-G series cards. For a thread on this specific topic, please see http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/Forum2/HTML/006441.html

--Chris

[This message has been edited by chm (edited 01 June 2001).]

[Dr Mordrid]

Wally,

You mean someone other than me makes VCD's of BattleBots?? I'm shocked

As for CPU overhead with RGB, not that much of a problem. At one time I had a Celeron 450 doing half frame (320x200) and full frame (640x480) being done with the PIII/600 & 850 with ease. Sure, its more CPU intensive than a hardware solution but right in line with HuffYUV and other softcodecs.

Dr. Mordrid


[This message has been edited by Dr Mordrid (edited 01 June 2001).]

[Vidgal]

My G400-TV has worked relatively well, but I too have been holding off on 2k until the new drivers came out. Now, Win 2k means all dv for me. I'll either be using the Matrox as a video card only or looking for another card with TV out.

In answer to the original poll question: Will I buy Matrox again? The changes of me buying another Matrox card are somewhere between slim and none -- and Slim is on vacation! I've let this company's restrictions drive my bus for too long already. I, for one, I'm done.

[wkulecz]

Hapz,

I don't think DV captures of SVHS sources look washed out at all. As far as I can tell the 4:1:1 of DV vs. 4:2:2 of analog captures is mainly an issue if you are doing "blue screen" chromakey effects. A "green screen" works better with the color gamet of DV. If color "fidelity" is your goal you need other than NTSC from the get go. The color shifts amoung the six diffenent TVs / NTSC monitors I have around the house swamp the "loss" in going from 4:2:2 SVHS to 4:1:1 DV. This may matter more with PAL, I've no way of knowing.


As I've said, dozens of people have seen my Battlebots VCDs played full screen on a computer monitor, most simply assumed they were watching a VHS tape. To me, this speaks very highly of TMPGEnc's quality when encoding from DV captures of SVHS recordings.

--wally.

[coolfish]

Chris, Matrox isn't American. It's Canadian. And up here in Canada, we tend to be a bit more polite, eh. And giving a bunch of users the shaft is not polite.

Next poll question - who wants to head out to Montreal and peg Matrox's HQ's with Timbits?

[mikiem]

I know this thread is beat to death, but I'm posting anyway, if for no other reason then to comment on the childish "mine is bigger then yours" challenge made earlier doc.

Don't know 'bout you yankees, but only being up here for couple of years, figured most of y'all figured out that a well placed slug or nice grouping of shotgun pellets usually ends the step out back arguments real quick like. And no this aint no threat -- just teasing real friendly like.

Now, to the point at hand...

Does Matrox et al deserve some kindness, understanding, & respect? Yeah -- from their momma's! From the rest of us they've had to earn it... or not -- it's up to the individual, & I'd no more tell anyone who to hate then I'd try and talk you into who to promote to sainthood.

Ford tried blaming Firestone when tires on their Explorers started to blow... Best of my recollection that didn't really fly.

See, thing is that Ford decided to make cars and trucks, built the Explorer, then chose to put Firestone tires on 'em. The fact that it was a much worse problem down south where the roads got real hot didn't matter -- no one said we're only selling this vehicle with these tires to folks in Alaska, nor did they market it solely to engineers with the expectation they'd know not to drive their Explorer over hot roads.

Facts are Ford did know something about the problem in South America where it surfaced first, & they kept quiet, making a big mess bigger, 'cause everyone figures they the experts, they should'a known.

Now no one's going to recall a bunch of video cards obviously, BUT, you can see the similarities...

Matrox chose to go into business making video cards. It's their business to know windows, 'cause just like the competition, that's the road they are driven on. You can't really expect the average person to worry about such things -- I mean, when you buy a PC monitor do you expect it not to work when you plug it in?

Second, If Matrox was trying & failed, something I have no personal knowledge of one way or t'other, they could have brought this up before the 11th hour, or they could have tried a D--- the torpedoes approach.

Obviously they didn't make a statement long ago when things went off schedule. And now they admitedly are limiting whatever they gove the win98 users, "unfairly", I suspect because someone figures they've beat that old dog long enough. That does not build confidence, & many folks are left to imagine their own version of Matrox's motives while Haig seems to be caught in a vise.

So, whatever, whomever, Matrox as a whole screwed up 'cause they got a bunch of angry customers where they once had loyal supporters. DON'T MATTER WHO OR WHY, and explaining some technical BS over and over AINT gonna fix nothing! Assuming anyone who doesn't share your point of view, or really cares about your argument is an idgit don't cut it guy.

If Zoran was at fault, or if some other company uses different hardware or methods, whose choice was it to use whatever chips and methods Matrox used? If the issue is the newer unified windows driver model, that's been around for years.

So while I have no doubt what you keep saying is valid, it's still 5 miles off target! You may have more knowledge or experience, certainly more money to play with then I do when it comes to things video, but when it comes to CR, with 30+ years in I think I got you beat.

You're not winning Matrox or this forum any friends or converts scaring them away or into silence. You're not helping calm the situation, this tech sort of BS never does, because you're telling people they are wrong, using arguments that don't have anything to do with the anger, the outrage they feel. I mean really, if you found your wife in bed with another man, would your first impulse be to strike up a conversation with the guy, maybe check out the (ahem) attributes, try to find out first hand why?

So what d'ya say Doc... You've suffered through a lot of dreary weather, maybe know some folks who are the subject of curse after curse, gotten riled yourself. You've made invaluable contributions here and elsewhere, so how 'bout giving the same speech a rest, taking comfort in the fact that your stuff works.

And if ya still wanna meet outside the bar, could ya make it one on the west side, and oh yeah, wear something identifiable I can tell the good ol' boys from down south to look for. Me, I've been disabled for durn near 10 years, couldn't make it down the stairs today myself, & it hasn't worked for years either so my size is irrelevant.

[stevem]

The G400-TV I bought over a year ago was my second Matrox purchase -- it will also be my last. I purchased this product expecting to use it as advertised (e.g., mpeg capture) on the Windows platform. I've been using W2K for over a year now as well and the Video features of my G400-TV have been almost useless. I have been patiently waiting for over a year now for updated, non-Beta versions of the driver and video tools. To be told now, after being strung along by Matrox, that they will not fully support this product is simply infuriating.



This is just poor, poor, poor customer service. I don't know how Matrox could ever expect me to want to buy another one of their products. I've been following the forums on Matrox's site for some time now. These are the things that anger me the most:



1. Beta-quality (read: buggy) software for more than a year


2. Instead of being up-front with its customers, Matrox repeatedly responds to questions about driver/software updates with "no comment" responses.


3. Promising updated drivers for months and then abandoning their promises without so much as an apology.



The LEAST Matrox should do for G400-TV (and other abandoned product customers) is to provide an inexpensive upgrade path to their supported product(s) (e.g., eTV).



I will never purchase another Matrox product and will adamantly recommend others not to purchase Matrox products.

[zaz]

Nope. Looking for a replacement card(s) now.

Maybe they've had problems with the Zoran chip and w2k. I never plan on having w2k. My big complaints are they released broken drivers a year ago and are not necessarily go to fix them. Also, the fact that they are getting out of the 3D race affects my decision as well.

Video capture and editing are a hobby. I also use my computers for work and play. I don't like having to have 3 different cards in my computer for doing the 3 different tasks if I don't have to.

Matrox has not been competitive in the 3D world for a long time. I was contemplating what I needed to do to get a boost in 3D performance anyway. Leaving myself and many others high and dry in regard to the video tools is just more sand kicked in my face.

Too bad, I've highly recommended matrox products to many others in the past. I cannot do so anymore.

[This message has been edited by zaz (edited 08 June 2001).]

[frogster]

Just wanted to be added to the poll.

No more matrox cards for me.

Also, I'm still rereading the g400tv product description on Matrox's web page for anything about it being "designed only for windows 98".

[huzoo]

I have owned many Matrox products, as well as many other brands of video cards. I bought the RRG to replace my RRS and was told at the time - by Matrox - that Win2k support was coming. I have been upset with Matrox over their slow driver releases and obviously this whole mess, but I can't say that they're a whol lot worse than most other hardware/software companies right now. I would probably buy another card from them only because the standard 2D performance and clarity is probably the best I have seen. Their support for their video cards only has not been too bad, but I will not buy another "enhanced card" or addon card from them again.