MS Critcal Update for nvidia

I noticed that too.... only difference i'm aware of is that the 44.03
drivers at Nvidias site are only whql for FX cards whereas the MS critical
update driver is 44.03 whql for all cards..... who knows, i've ignored it
so far.

"Richard" wrote in message
...
When accessing Windows update for windows XP pro it tells me I need to
download a critical update for my nvidia geforce 3. I always stay away
fro
MS drivers since in my experience they don't work. I'm running 30.82
drivers just fine. Had some problems with the 44.x driver. What is so
critical about updating a display driver that works?

Alan Hale said it best.

-Stow it Gilligan

"who be dat?" wrote in message
...
snip
Now be a
good ferret and go download their driver like the rest of the lemmings who
don't mind being cheated by Nvidia...

Chris Smith

"neopolaris" . wrote in message ...
Alan Hale said it best.

-Stow it Gilligan

Ahh, showing your age (prolly remember SWAT, Rockford Files, Rat Patrol, god
forbid the Mod Squad too...naah, clearly the McHale's Navy type) and your
attitude again? So, Mary Ann or Ginger?

"who be dat?" wrote in message
...
snip
Now be a
good ferret and go download their driver like the rest of the lemmings
who
don't mind being cheated by Nvidia...

Chris Smith

I'll probably get shot down in flames, but this is a Driver rather than
Critical Update from Microsoft and it is Driver version 44.03 certified by
MS for all Nvidia Graphics Cards.
If your system works OK with the 4*.** range of drivers you should have no
problems.
1 PC using a Geforce 2 card had no problems and works well with this update,
2nd PC using Geforce 4 card had sound break-up during bootup of XP home
using any driver in the range 40 to 44.**. Cured by using ver 45.20 drivers
from 3D Guru.
Have a Good Day.



--
Paul Woodsford
Remove ****NOSPAMPLEASE**** to Reply
"Richard" wrote in message
...
When accessing Windows update for windows XP pro it tells me I need to
download a critical update for my nvidia geforce 3. I always stay away
fro
MS drivers since in my experience they don't work. I'm running 30.82
drivers just fine. Had some problems with the 44.x driver. What is so
critical about updating a display driver that works?

On Sat, 02 Aug 2003 05:16:55 +0000, Dave wrote:


"neopolaris" . wrote in message ...
Alan Hale said it best.

-Stow it Gilligan

Ahh, showing your age (prolly remember SWAT, Rockford Files, Rat Patrol, god
forbid the Mod Squad too...naah, clearly the McHale's Navy type) and your
attitude again? So, Mary Ann or Ginger?


Mary Ann!

I recommend that you *do not* install the drivers from Windows Update. =
Here's the reason why those drivers were made part of critical updates =
according to a guy from Microsoft who posted on the Windows Update =
newsgroup.

The thread is called nVidia drivers:

Here is info on this driver as well:
This driver is nVidia detonator driver version 44.03 (the=20
same one that is on their website currently however this=20
one is WHQL signed and has more specific support for=20
certain nVidia hardware). This driver was on the Driver=20
Update section but after it was there for almost a month=20
it was pushed out as a Critical Update to get wider=20
coverage.

news://msnnews.msn.com/microsoft.public.windowsupdate

People who have downloaded the Windows Update version of this nVidia =
drivers are reporting problems with the drivers on the Windows Update =
newsgroup.

Joe


"Richard" wrote in message =
...
When accessing Windows update for windows XP pro it tells me I need to
download a critical update for my nvidia geforce 3. I always stay =
away fro
MS drivers since in my experience they don't work. I'm running 30.82
drivers just fine. Had some problems with the 44.x driver. What is =
so
critical about updating a display driver that works?
=20
=20

P.S. The thread is actually called "nvidia update" instead of nvidia =
drivers.

Joe

"Joe727" wrote in message =
...
I recommend that you *do not* install the drivers from Windows Update. =
Here's the reason why those drivers were made part of critical updates =
according to a guy from Microsoft who posted on the Windows Update =
newsgroup.

The thread is called nVidia drivers:

Here is info on this driver as well:
This driver is nVidia detonator driver version 44.03 (the=20
same one that is on their website currently however this=20
one is WHQL signed and has more specific support for=20
certain nVidia hardware). This driver was on the Driver=20
Update section but after it was there for almost a month=20
it was pushed out as a Critical Update to get wider=20
coverage.

news://msnnews.msn.com/microsoft.public.windowsupdate

People who have downloaded the Windows Update version of this nVidia =
drivers are reporting problems with the drivers on the Windows Update =
newsgroup.

Joe


"Richard" wrote in message =
...
When accessing Windows update for windows XP pro it tells me I need to
download a critical update for my nvidia geforce 3. I always stay =
away fro
MS drivers since in my experience they don't work. I'm running 30.82
drivers just fine. Had some problems with the 44.x driver. What is =
so
critical about updating a display driver that works?
=20
=20
=20

"Helion" wrote in message
. com...
LMAO.... to this day i would take the overall stability of a GF4/FX anyday
over a ATI... I really dont give a **** what some 3d benchmark written by
former "futurecrew" members says i have "points wise". Real-World gaming
for me is all the benchmark i need. I really love all those 9700/9800
overclockers who damn near burn up their card{s} trying to get a high
score
which impresses who??? (Hey baby, look at this score) What is most
software
written for? The GF series or the Radeons?... hehe think about it. I
know
my fast eyes can tell the difference between 130 fps and 135 fps.

Not stable?! Ye is a fanboy, I see...

Overclocking 9800's so they run like flaming bats out of hell?! Yeah, I've
never of Nvidia users doing that.

What is most software written for?! Eh, both of them ye of little brain
matter!! The only games I'm aware of that will be written specifically for
either card are Doom III (Geforce) and Half-Life 2 (ATi, probably be the
game of the year and light years beyond Doom III). Care to provide a list
of ALL the games specifically written for Geforce's. Here's a tip sparky:
games with the paid for advertisement of "The way it's meant to be played"
Nvidia logo at the start of a game aren't written for Nvidia. Those are
just *gasp* advertisements.

And if your eyes can truly tell the difference (they can't, you lying
BSer...), then you'll want to go grab 9800 or wait for a 9900. The FX's
aren't cutting it.

Chris Smith

"Keith Clark" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 02 Aug 2003 05:16:55 +0000, Dave wrote:


"neopolaris" . wrote in message
...
Alan Hale said it best.

-Stow it Gilligan

Ahh, showing your age (prolly remember SWAT, Rockford Files, Rat Patrol,
god
forbid the Mod Squad too...naah, clearly the McHale's Navy type) and
your
attitude again? So, Mary Ann or Ginger?


Mary Ann!

Definitely, Mary Ann.

BTW, thanks alot for putting the SWAT theme song in my head! da na naaa, da
na naah.....Excuse me I gotta turn on the radio or something. LOL

neopolaris

"who be dat?" wrote in message
...

"Helion" wrote in message
. com...

snip

And if your eyes can truly tell the difference (they can't, you lying
BSer...), then you'll want to go grab 9800 or wait for a 9900. The FX's
aren't cutting it.

We'll see what's what when things get rollin' and hardware-specific paths
are written. The FX is (so far) largely untapped potential. The 9500s on up
work well in the here-and-now (and how!), as for the FX' es, they have a big
set of britches to grow into. Wouldn't be surprised to see them doing better
when Doom III hits the shelves. The HL2 flap is a little discouraging
though, I must admit...

Looks a little like Return of Glide (proprietary coding) to me...using
Cg beats the pants off reference API calls...

BTW the 44.03's suck. Stay away from them. And Windows Update often has
things M$ wants you to have, not necessarily things YOU want. Remember this.
Because it's gonna become more of an issue...

Apparently M$ is switching to a cost-accountability model among its
divisions much like GE under Jack Welch (the best person to happen to GE,
IMHO). But it's not Jack. It's Billy and Steve and Co. (and a whole lot of
grey suits that want access to your box, just like what was worked out
behind closed doors with the M$ investigation). Writing's on the wall,
folks. Many implications follow. Here's one: It's only a small hop up to a
paid subscription service to updates that consist of fixes for **** that
should never have made it out the door (or an account for subscribed
services like a cable channel with a personal license key that unlocks stuff
already built in and installed to your hard drive, and you are billed
accordingly, of course you have to be connected to the 'net so their remote
validation server will see you)...and OS "enhancements" consisting of
enabled functionality for stuff that third-party apps once did better until
M$ decided to co-opt their function. And of course they're not liable for
any damage and lost time an update might cause. The free ride is about to be
OVER. Perish the thought of what we pay for the disk of beta product in the
first place (well some of us anyway...). I imagine "Critical Updates" will
still be offered free, for obvious reasons. I know, it sounds Chicken
Little-ish, reeks of apocalyptic doom an' all that, but actually it is a
very effective business model, especially for a monopoly. Strap on and enjoy
the ride!