G400 and Whistler

[rob_b]

This is the first I heard about it. Couldn't
find anything on Microsoft's site about it.
Is it in Beta right now ? Can it be downloaded from somewhere ? Rob_b

[Gurm]

rob:

Yes, it's a beta. No, it won't be called Whistler. It will likely be called Windows.NET 1.0 when it is released.

Yeah, you can download it. All you have to do is sign up to be an MS beta tester, and then you download it from their site. Easy, huh?

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

[vanguardian1]

Where can I sign up for Beta testing?

------------------

[Ashley]

Rags, I didn't follow that. In VGA mode, its true you have no multimonitor support, but you also don't have more than 16 colors, or any 2D or 3D acceleration.

Microsoft has guidelines in the DDK on what must be done for multimonitor compliance. If I add a 2nd card to a Win2K or 98/ME system, Windows detects and prompts *me* for a driver. If the driver that subsequently gets loaded is compliant, I will then have the option of enabling it in Microsoft's Display Properties.

[Gurm]

Yes, I was under the impression that the problem was that Win2k wasn't allowing a single driver to enumerate multiple displays, whereas WIn9x was. Ashley explained it better, but in the registry there are multiple display entries for all your video cards (and some that used to be in your system, lol). If the OS doesn't allow a single driver to enumerate multiple displays then the best you can get is the "stretched desktop". If it DOES allow it, then you can get separate desktops supported by the OS.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

[Rags]

Ashley,

You are very correct if you are using either two cards or two chipsets, but windows doesn't act quite the same way with dualhead. Like I said before, this was AFAIK, and I have no official word on this. I am just speaking from the knowledge I do have, and puting it all together. At any rate, having dualhead under win2k/NT means that the drivers have to be written in such a way that it will enable a virtual desktop across two monitors, and with the drivers written that way, I see no way you could tell if whistler fixes anything, unless there are specific drivers for it. You follow me here?

Rags

[DentyCracker]

So Rags, what you are saying is that even if Whistler has fixed it so that dual head works ala Win98, the drivers would have to be written in a way to take advantage of this and further to that as far as you know the current drivers for win2k are not. Correct?

[Greebe]

Yes exactly!

[Ashley]

LOL - Now I understand where this is going.

If it doesn't work, blame Microsoft. If it does work, thank Matrox.

I hope the Rage MAXX marketing people at ATI can learn something from this...

[Rags]

Ashley,

You are so full of it, I bet you can't stand yourself

I am just speculating, that's all. If you can't take it at that, then I feel sorry for you.

Rags

[Gurm]

Rags,

I hate to side against you here, but you ARE kinda coming off as if you have direct knowledge of how the drivers are written. I also assumed (because of statements made by MATROX themselves) that the drivers WERE written to take advantage of the OS, if and when the OS offered this support.

Now, either one of us could be wrong. However, you have been sounding as if you KNOW you aren't.

Just 'cuz Ashley had that little BIOS "mishap" is no reason to pick on the poor sod. (Evil wink!)

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

[Rags]

Gurm, when I put AFAIK. That means exactly what is says. I do know how drivers basically work, and understand the limitation under win2k, and why the desktop has to be stretched. It is my understanding that if the drivers were already built to take advantage of a feature that doesn't exist, then we wouldn't have the feature we do now, but of course I may be wrong again, but I really doubt it.

Rags

[GinoCyber]

This dualhead single chip thingy is dependant on both the OS and the driver.

Assuming that whistler supports dh ala 98, it is then upto the driver to also supply the support.

Why is this hard to understand

I also doubt that the dh support in matrox's 98 drivers are going to be the same code for the whistler support. Yes the interface may look the same but what makes you guys think that the low level aspect will be the same?

Ciao

[mynx]

Off topic question. Does whistler have dual processor support like 2000 or does it only support one like 98.

[Pace]

Whistler will support as many CPUs as you can throw at it (3 might be a problem though, as will 2^10 ).

The Professional edition will be basically identical to Win2k other that it'll have web integration everywhere! There's been some early screenshots about but it does look nice !

The Personal edition is what will replace the Windows 9x line - think of this as Win2k with single CPU support and an even more simplified interface! Start Panel instead of Menu etc.

Paul.

------------------
Pace3000 Network: (early stages)
Arena | Seti | P3K | TechSupport | Portal
Matrox Users / SETI@MURC
Join the team! | Crunch faster! | View the stats!

Edit: throw was initially spelt through , hehe!

[This message has been edited by Pace (edited 06 October 2000).]