Tweet
Uhhhh, yes it did, Hawkeye. 
Still rolling from that one.
------------------
FedEx Sucks!
Still rolling from that one.
------------------
FedEx Sucks!
-
-
Paul,
MS is not positioning this as a consumer OS, that is my point. CE or not, MS determines what is going to be installed on end-user's systems, not you or your OEM. If the vast majority of OS's out there in Joe, software buying, Public's pc's is Millenium, then the software developers are going to support Millenium. So, it wouldn't matter if it were to be the Lamborghini of OS's, there won't have software support unless people are using it. I have Win2K, and the game support is getting better, but it is still a long ways off.
And let's be realistic, comparing CE to Win2K is like comparing a honda CRX to an Acura NSX, yeah they are both built by the same company with some of the same core technologies, but they are different beasts.
Rags
------------------
FedEx Sucks!
Comment
-
Rattledagger: Sorry, missed your question about the G200. There is no G200 ICD in RC2. The 3D listing in the HCL refers to Direct3D. I haven't tried the NT4 ICD, it might work with Windows 2000.
PaulComment
-
No, the G200 ICD can hardly be called working in W2k. Forget about OpenGL for now using W2k with a Matrox card.
Rags
------------------
FedEx Sucks!
[This message has been edited by Rags (edited 09-19-1999).]Comment
-
Rags,
Systems with Windows 2000 are probably going to be less than $100 more that those with Millennium. How many people do you know that aren't constantly wrestling with Windows 95/98? When it comes to small price differences, OEM's and customers are going to choose whatever causes them the less grief - and I'm pretty sure that will drive the uptake of Windows 2000.
Games developers will use Windows 2000 because of its stability also, I don't think there is any doubt of that. Games running on Windows 2000 will probably run on the Microsoft Game Console without any porting, so there is another reason.
Anyway, you and I will have to wait and see who is right. Matrox however shouldn't be waiting. They should be out the front waving their beta drivers saying "we are going to have the fastest Windows 2000 video solutions around".
Leaving gaming for a second. What about their video editing tools? Again NT is well behind, and yet it would clearly be the preferred system for such work. How many people would feel confident buying a Matrox solution in the hope that they will get it together for Windows 2000?
More than most other card manufacturers, Matrox has to be a bit pro-active here. They have not done the right thing by their NT customers in the past, and they need to go "above and beyond" to win back some of that confidence. Considering recent history, telling people that it will be ready by RTM doesn't cut it for most of us.
I am sticking with my G200 until until I see the quality of Matrox's Win2K drivers. I also want a video editing solution, but again, I wait to see the software before I buy the hardware.
Paul.Comment
-
Paul, I hope you are right. I would like to see the end of the legacy OS's. It would be good for everyone in the end, and it would end forever the dual MS OS debate. I am not defending Matrox's drivers in NT, I don't think that anyone out there could defend them successfuly. I hope that they do come around with some good support. I think they will, if their current rate of driver dev. is any indication.
Rags
------------------
FedEx Sucks!
Comment
-
to PaulS:
AFAIK DirectDraw 3.0 under NT 4 is hardware-accelerated...
The rest of my respons was about q3 that runs as good in smp-mode on NT4 as in win2k. If you have drivers supporting this, of course. If you're sitting with the wrong card, quake3 will be unplayable both in NT4 and win2k.
------------------
Asus P2B-DS, dual P2-333, 256 MB, G200, SB 128. OS: NT 4/5.Comment
-
The only catch I see to this whole thing is this:
If Matrox is writing for WDM (Windows Driver Model) then having drivers for both Win98 and W2K is a no-brainer....
Then again, when was Matrox known to do too many things the logical way?! (just kidding, I really like Matrox)
PaulS, what's all this about a Microsoft Game Console?Comment
-
Sorry Rattledagger, definitely no directx hardware acceleration for NT 4, only OpenGL. Q3 has a certain amount of sound lag under NT 4 that isn't present with W2K, however you are correct that the performance depends mostly on how well the OpenGL driver is written.
AlgoRhythm, the MS games console is supposed to take on Sony and Nintendo. The big bonus for developers is that DirectX games will require little or no porting. Due out next year.
Paul.Comment
-
MS' games console is just a PC in a small box. It'll have a gforce256 in it, and maybe an Athlon CPU. (Anyone remember the wintel alliance? )
Hmmm, a console that crashes and has a ctrl-alt-del on the joypad? Novel.
------------------
Cheers,
Steve
PS: Some or all of the above message may be wrong, or, just as likely, correct. Depends on what mood I'm in. And what you know. ;¬)
Comment
-
Ya. But somehow... The gaming market is _large_, and, Mickeysoft got their own special way to "persuade" (right spelled?) people. Interesting times.. indeed interesting...
------------------
Sometimes I think you have to march right in and demand your rights, even if you don't know what your rights are, or who the person is you're talking to. Then, on the way out, slam the door.Comment
-
I have a friend, he's mostly using his computer to play games on. He also use it to play mp3 files. And pherhaps some schoolwork every now and then. Now, when I told him about win2k, and it's supposed (and now proved) features, he got really excited. Why? cus he, as the awerage "dumb" (ain't got to much computer skills nah) PC consumer, has indeed got bitten by the bugs in win9x. So, no matter what Mickesofts little bill say's, Windows 2000 is a name screaming "commersial consumers, here I am".
hmm.. not much else to add to this discussion...
Now that x-box (ms console) seemed interesting... I wonder how long it takes until it's out-FPS'ed by Napalm or Matrox G600 UltraMax And how long games written for win2k/9x get's too heavy for it... Mickeysoft must then convince developers to make their game compatible with a low-end (when it get's low-end, that is) Geforca/AMD.
Now that MUST get interesting...
------------------
Somebody told me it was frightening how much topsoil we are losing each year, but I told that story around the campfire and nobody got scared.Comment
-
It will be low end, as they are talking of a 600mhz ish Athlon, with the geforce256, all well and good NOW, but the console is to be released at the end of next year. Why are they bothering? They should just stick to PCs. They already have wince on the dreamcast. PCs will have overtaken the x-box console before the start of next year, nevermind at the end.
------------------
Cheers,
Steve
PS: Some or all of the above message may be wrong, or, just as likely, correct. Depends on what mood I'm in. And what you know. ;¬)
Comment
-
Well, I don't know that they games get "low-end" it such a important issue. Just look at the playstation. It _****en suck_, but it still sells!
------------------
You know one thing that will really make a woman mad? Just run up and kick her in the butt. (P.S. This also works with men.)
Comment
-
And it still will sell. I think that the console market is set to be Sony's, Nintendo's and Sega's. And it always will be.
I just can't see it working, not if microsoft it behind it.
------------------
Cheers,
Steve
PS: Some or all of the above message may be wrong, or, just as likely, correct. Depends on what mood I'm in. And what you know. ;¬)
Comment
Comment