Ok, I think it's time for a WHATSNEW.TXT-Haig

[red2]

It can't be that hard to post a file which states what's been fixed and known issues in the driver releases. Surely, there is a such a file internally or do only the driver writers know what is going on?

[Haig]

Hi Red2,

It's not that simple. Anytime we release any type of driver be it official or beta, there are virtually hundreds of fixes that were done.

We go thru close to 40-50 builds between each driver release where with each build, we do have a list of what was fixed. The problem is that this list is not accumulative for each build.

Each build will have a doc specific to what was fixed for that build.

I can easily cut n paste what was fixed from each build and put it as one document but we include alot of bug fixes for our OEM's which we can't publically state.

So, this would mean that someone would have to go thru all the builds, see which fixes were not for the OEM's and create a document.

Or, I can easily highlight the main fixes for each release but this would be more of a 5 item list. I don't think that this would work because some folks would not understand and complain "is that all you fixed?"

Not too sure on this but isn't ROM already doing something like this for the games?

Haig

[kyank]

Haig,

I think the need is definitely there for the user to be able to determine if an issue he or she is experiencing will be fixed by a driver update without having to download, uninstall old, and install new to find out.

Even the five-item list would be better than nothing at all. If you're really worried about that list being taken as "all that was fixed", then add "Plus a zillion other minor fixes!" at the end of the list.

-Kev.

[Haig]

Note taken Kev.

The only reason why I'd be worried about the complaints about "is that all" is that it could cause bad publicity to new or potential clients.

But your added note looks good.

Thanks,

Haig

[Himself]

Mr. Haig,

Forget specific and actual mentions of code, nobody will understand what you are talking about anyway. I agree though that some mention of what is new would be a plus, perhaps the fixed game list and any mentions of performance increases would do the trick.
That other guy is doing that, ROM, is it? It's nice he hangs out here, but that doesn't help the people who never visit here.

Even describing it as a performance release or a maintenance release would help. It would cut down on the mad benchmarking if people knew it was just about bug fixes.

BTW, if you guys actually start doing this you'll be one up on folks like NVIDIA/Creative/Diamond who keep including the same readme.txt that references files that never saw the light of day from the beginning, refer to floppy disks, or cards that have nothing to do with the drivers, etc.

I mean there has got to be something to say about all the hard work. Relate a funny story or something if you get stuck.

Regards,

Byron

[Rags]

How about including the names, addresses, and phone numbers of each of the programmers of that particular release. That would come in VERY handy.


Rags



------------------
P3 450@560, BH6, 128MB PC100, Delta CD ROM, Mill.G200/G400, 8.4G WD, 8.4G seagate, SB16 (temp.), Yamaha Burner, Zip, Sportster 56K int., Storm Scanner.

[Scytale]

I can only agree with what was said before, before Rags took the mike that is

If there is confidential information in the release history information, then change the history notes procedure (from the start) and make two documents: release history notes, and a confidential addendum...

Hmm, I still wonder if the AGP2X crash thing was supposed to be fixed. I'll have to ask Haig about it again...

[The PIT]

I can remember going to intels web page and downloading a whats fixed file for one their bios releases. This printed out onto about 10 to 16 pages of fixes which made me wonder how it ever worked. Anyway if Intel do it I can't see why Matrox can't.
Anyway since no one else seems to have said it thanks Haig and the rest of team for the quick turn around with these new drivers.

[bag_it]

A sanitised public version would be great! No nitty gritty (unless warranted). And if it version was accumulative, even better.

robert.

P.S. could you also make it clearer on your web site as to what is the current version of the G400 bios (the only one i'm currently concerned with).
--
Robert Hodkinson, SF nut and a Render-head. www.geocities.com/SoHo/Coffeehouse/5939
reply email is bag.it@cableol.co.uk

[GD]

I would really like a what's new file... I would have the feeling that Matrox respects me and protecting me fro "putting-powerdesk-in-and-out-of-windows-display-properties" like changes.

and I would really like to see the techy fixes :-)

George D.

[Haig]

Hi guys,

how bout a list of the main bug fixes?

This would be only for an official driver release, not for any beta stuff.

I won't include any OEM fixes nor any fixes that can open up a "can of worms."

If there are any new features that we put in, I'll include that too.

Haig

[This message has been edited by Haig (edited 09-12-1999).]

[jedimasta]

Oh yeah, that would be good, better than nothing anyway, post it! It's just too bad that couldn't be posted on the web site (hint hint, nudge nudge)



------------------
JÊÐî /'\å§tå
-“Artificial Intelligence has got nothing on Natural Stupidity!”

[red2]

That's great Haig. Please do the same with the BIOS files too. Major changes, features added, and "dozens of other minor fixes" as your disclaimer for OEM's

[Himself]

Haig,

Main bug fixes is ok with me, hell anything beyond how to install the drivers for the Nth time would be nice. In fact a separate file would be a good idea, I don't even read readme's anymore because they are so rarely updated. Just remember that not everyone has been a Matrox owner for several years or hangs out here.

[PaulS]

Hi Haig,

Why can't you list the OEM fixes? MS lists plenty of vendor specific issues in their service packs and knowledge base articles; it is a great benefit to support people if they can bypass the helpdesks of the major OEMs.

Paul