Parhelia's gonna be lame (not MY opinion, but Tom's)

[capt. marvel]

well thanx ...that was rather timely ....we'll keep it in mind.

Next up.... a review of the next Matrox card will be posted in May of 2006.

[EFA11]

wow, I thought it was a mail glitch sending me email from the past. This thread is a year old

[Sasq]

as I make a mental note to increase the font size of the post date and make it flashing red...

[stevenscott]

basically, what your saying is no comparrisons are fair, because the Parhelia is 1 year old? It is included in tests, because, well because it is the premiere and latest Matrox card for the category in the comparisons tests, benchmarks...etc.... Should the Matrox Video cards be left out of all tests, just because there is not one less than 1 year old? Lock the thread? Wqaaaaa...waaa..it's not fair....
????


Look .... maybe it was timely, just because the test came one year late ?

maybe you don understand my post timing, but I don't understand why the matrox card should have been excluded from the tests results..??

Is there another Matrox card that should be used instead, kind of an 'affirmative action for video cards that woulda, should, coulda ' ???

all kidding aside, the info given was new, don't blame the messenger...

[Chrono_Wanderer]

No... when we say its not timely, we mean this old news. I mean... almost everybody here knows the Parhelia is a failure. Out of the blue this 1 year old thread pops back up to the top is like... eh... no offend or anything... stating the obvious.

When I saw the title of this thread I was like WTF why is this in the crystal ball... shouldn't it be in Matrox Hardware. But when I check the date I discovered that this is 1 year old and when this thread started we were still speculating about Parhelia. Keep in mind this Crystal Ball forum is used to speculate about future Matrox hardware, not to discuss any current Matrox hardware. So if you wanna complain, do it in Matrox Hardware. But then, we already have a bunch of topics repeating the same sh*t over and over again... kinda boring and out of date if you ask me.

@Mods/Ant: You are more than welcome to delete my post if I said anything I am not supposed. But I am just trying to explain...

[stevenscott]

sorry, but I did not know it was stil being discussed. I know it was old news, but was like a few others who were probably shocked to hear how it was ran over. Truly sorry I am, for not knowing it was so totally hashed over, I did not keep up wit this card. It is only now I have recently looked so closely and was expecting better from it. it seems like yeserday I was reading about the spying and rumors, and sneak pictures and some Chinese Expo somewhere showing a sneak at the new Matrox card, way ahead of the curve.

.... then I went looking for a card in a next major purchase (very long overdue)...hehehhe...well, this forum being one of my old stomping grounds...... I saw this thread..and well, could not help but show a new benchmark still using Matrox in it, well, it's the best Matrox card, for this purpose, in it's range. It is still filling the slot for Matrox. The price is stil very high for the card. So, it must be very good for maybe other applications I don't use, maybe CAD. Multiple monitors, maybe, but other cards do a couple monitors. But, anyways, these tests were new, the card is a whopping 1 years old. hell, my G400 is 3 years old now... and it stil pops up on some boards and forums. Still shocked 1 year! and so old news that brining it up brings....well, brings cringing...
well, at least it was near the middle of the tests, not at the bottom.... a door prize...