What Parhelia II features do you want???

[Ssin]

That's because some weirdo thought that "MX" would lead ppl to think of it as "Master eXperience"

[Mark F]

How sad it is!

One has to wonder what will come of Matrox as even Intel's integrated graphics surpass their "high end" performance card and with dual-head capabilities (at least as an option) on some integrated graphics.

I've owned every generational iteration of Matrox cards from the MilleniumII through the G550. But. I have not been motivated to Parhelia. I've thought about useing it if I build another Video edition box, and decide to use 3 monitors ( oh yeah that's why I haven't upgraded the box ). A Parehia and X.100 would be great, but oh so much cash!!!

If they came out with a resonably priced triple-head card, and a competative ( not neccessarilly "fastest", just competative in performance and price ) card to play some games on, I'd surely by both.

As for NOW as I plan to upgrade my game box, well it'll be one of the other guys cards. The game box(s) have been Nv'ed since the G400Max went into the General Purpose box, replaced by a TNT2 ultra. The box I'm typeing this on uses a G550, but might as well be integrated video if Duel MP systems had come with it.

I beleive MATROX has held that the high end is not profitable enough. OK, but that is were the mindshares are created. How many OEM deals are Matrox anouncing lately? Sure they exist but not in the numbers they once did, and even less of late. I worry about the once great M.

What do I want from a Parhelia II :

a) A card competative in today's ( at the time of launch ) market
b) A card worthy of the MATROX name
c) Diferentiation to make cards suitted to there market and tasks

Are these too much to ask for?
Hope not!!

[Ssin]

I believe that Matrox was once regarded with high esteem by other company as to "this is the thing we should get close to" in term of performance (at least in the past glory of 2D). Nowadays ppl only think about 3D perf. well at least it's the part of the specs that everybody wants to check first. While the other companies were strugling to achieve high perfs out of their cards and were throwing big amount of cash into R&D what did Matrox?... sit on its pile of gold and release _some_ products that they thought were going to be hits like when they released Millennium I & II. At that time concurrence was nowhere to be seen. Nowadays almost every competitor has chips and cards that can rival with Matrox's in term of visual quality but frankly outsurpasses M in term in performance for 1/4 the price. What, then, would be a consumer logical choice?

I must say that I totaly agree with you Mark F.
I want a card that is worthy of Matrox's name, and that didn't happen IMO since G400Max.

_don't spread fire guys, I'm just sharing my thoughts_

[kevinkar]

I want to see all of the above enhancements PLUS:

I WANT POWERDESK VIRTUAL DESKTOP BACK THE WAY IT WAS!!!!

This was perhaps the best feature for anyone working graphics in the "old days". I had several Matrox cards (Millennium, Millennium II, G200, G400) over the years and they all had the best 2D image of ANY card out there. Using 4.2x or earlier drivers, they also had the fantastic hardware accelerated Virtual Desktop so you could set your screen resolution at the appropriate value yet display your images that were much bigger than that area and scroll about them at will by setting a larger virtual area of say 1920x2400.....

So I could open a 2000x2000 image while at my 17" monitor's best image at 1024x768 and scroll over the image just by moving the mouse. This was so much better than having the extra cost and used up space by a second monitor you need nowadays. Not to mention the UNIX style multiple desktop paradigm. You can't open up a large image and page through desktops and do any real work! Setting my monitor to some rediculous resolution of 1900x1280 really strains the eyes in order to see the full image.

No one else does it at all and you need software solutions that are few and far between to accomplish the same thing (though in software which is slow and jerky as opposed to in hardware). So Matrox isn't really alone in this regard, but they used to do it but dropped it.

By removing this feature from their later drivers, Matrox lost me as a customer and forced me to move to other vendors (I have since moved to ATI and while they also do not have a similar functionality, I have voiced my opinion to Matrox and stopped buying their products).

The thing that really bugs me about the whole thing is that the cards I used to use still have the capability to produce a virtual desktop in this fashion but Matrox simply removed the functionality from the drivers forcing me to run updated software in conjunction with outdated drivers that did and that caused more conflicts than the supposed Microsoft multiple desktop support Matrox was attempting to follow!

So they need to bring back the old Virtual Desktop. If they did, I might consider buying another Matrox card. Until then, no way.

Kevin

[Bigg]

I think that Matrox needs to look at this forum and think about everything that has been siad here. if they did, then they would have an excelent card that could hold its own against the big two for a long time (relativley). this may get some people to realize matrox and help matrox make a resurgence.

[bsdgeek]

Oh they're reading it alright, are they taking any of this "advice"? Probably not.

[Chrono_Wanderer]

Originally posted by Topha
edit: imagine the nVidia fairy demo running with RSN activated

Nay... all you need to do is to remove that 1 line CG code hehe.

[Chrono_Wanderer]

Originally posted by Pace
One wonders what marvel at Macromedia thought it a good idea to rename their whole line of products after the bottom line from NVIDIA

Who's up for Macromedia Flash FX, Macromedia FreeHand Ti, Macromedia Director GL, Macromedia Fireworks XP (remember DO NOT burn urself when using)...

O yea... and Nintendo 64... Athlon 64...

[Bigg]

Originally posted by bsdgeek
Oh they're reading it alright, are they taking any of this "advice"? Probably not.

I know I should think that they would take a lot of our advice, because well, we are a lot of their maybe future customers, and if they totaly appeal to us, then they should have wider appeal to the rest of the market, both gamer and proffesional alike.

[knirfie]

Originally posted by Chrono_Wanderer
Who's up for Macromedia Flash FX, Macromedia FreeHand Ti, Macromedia Director GL, Macromedia Fireworks XP (remember DO NOT burn urself when using)...

O yea... and Nintendo 64... Athlon 64...

Commodore 64

[Jizzler]

Re: What Parhelia II features do you want???

Originally posted by Bigg
What Parhelia II features do you want??? Here are a few I would like to see: (BTW these are in no particular order)
1) 1600x1200 triple DVI
2) 2048?x1536 triple vga
3) ti4800/radeon 9500 speed, maybe more
4)support for three monitors+the living room TV.
5) Same pcb degign as the parhelia, and 256MB of ram, like the parhelia 256MB.
6) Lower price (DUH!! )
7) More ocability, especially under vmod and peltier cooling

Yeah, I would like:

- Triple DVI.
- 10bit gigacolor on at all times - even in triplehead mode.
- Faster core/mem of course
- 256MB.

And if they don't deliver? No worry, PCI-E is around the corner, and as long as they produce PCI-E versions of the Parhelia 2, I'll buy 3

[Kurt]

I don't care about P-II at this point. I'd like a fully working P128 with faster clock speed.

Thank you

[K6-III]

I would like to see PII by next summer...

[thop]

The feature i'm looking for? Availability.

[az]

Realistic pricing... and maybe the absence of heavy bugs which destroy their reputation in the only area they were leading: Image Quality.

AZ