If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Response by Nvidia concerning HL2 *warning, lengthy post, strong opinion content, some bad langwidge* NC-17 rating administered...
I think we'll bother the ATI forum with this as well. Might hate me now, but
you might thank me later... "Lee Marsh" wrote in message ... We have a response straight from NVIDIA addressing the recent storm that snip. Let's just schlep the whole statement right into this thread, shall we? Naturally, some accompanying pithy and more not-so-concise jabs (wouldn't be myself without them...). This is not a troll, nor a mission for me to lambaste Nvidia, although I do my share of it. I would really like to see them succeed, provided they knock off the BS. This is to point out some inconsistencies I see just jumping out of this statement. I read it four ****ing times, and each time, the same things hit me in the same place: night in the ruts, so here's some noise from those bruised jimmies, as I feel that this type of nonsense really underestimates people's intelligence... "Over the last 24 hours, there has been quite a bit of controversy over comments made by Gabe Newell of Valve at ATIs Shader Day. (Fun's just beginning. A whole can of worms has been opened to the masses WRT Nvidia actual DX9 shader performance) During the entire development of Half Life 2, NVIDIA has had close technical contact with Valve regarding the game. However, Valve has not made us aware of the issues Gabe discussed. (I reiterate: So much for close technical contact. But Brian, being the nice guy and PR flack he is---I wouldn't expect him to say much differently than all this.) We're confused as to why Valve chose to use Release. 45 (Rel. 45) - because up to two weeks prior to the Shader Day we had been working closely with Valve to ensure that Release 50 (Rel. 50) provides the best experience possible on NVIDIA hardware. (Missing fog, perhaps? Or maybe screenshot artificial augmentation? Or something else the general public is not privy to, that Nvidia might be exploiting for PR's sake on the basis of lack of commonly available info, and Gabe is a little more dignified at the moment to sling the big mudballs with specifics? Who would put it past Nvidia after all said and done?) Regarding the Half Life2 performance numbers that were published on the web, we believe these performance numbers are invalid because they do not use our Rel. 50 drivers. Engineering efforts on our Rel. 45 drivers stopped months ago in anticipation of Rel. 50. NVIDIA's optimizations for Half Life 2 and other new games are included in our Rel.50 drivers - which reviewers currently have a beta version of today. Rel. 50 is the best driver we've ever built - it includes significant optimizations for the highly-programmable GeForce FX architecture and includes feature and performance benefits for over 100 million NVIDIA GPU customers. (So, essentially we should use whichever optimized driver set provides the best performance with whichever game it was designed to speed up, regardless whether they' a: released to the public and b: WHQL certified? So what if it breaks performance and/or functionality with other things, or previously implemented workarounds? And stating that the 50's are the best set yet...sans fog...is a little ludicrous. Talk is cheap. Release the drivers RFN and let the people be the judge, if you dare...) Pending detailed information from Valve, we are only aware one bug with Rel. 50 and the version of Half Life 2 that we currently have - this is the fog issue that Gabe referred to in his presentation. It is not a cheat or an over optimization. Our current drop of Half Life 2 is more than 2 weeks old. NVIDIA's Rel. 50 driver will be public before the game is available. Since we know that obtaining the best pixel shader performance from the GeForce FX GPUs currently requires some specialized work, our developer technology team works very closely with game developers. Part of this is understanding that in many cases promoting PS 1.4 (DirectX 8) to PS 2.0 (DirectX 9) provides no image quality benefit. Sometimes this involves converting 32-bit floating point precision shader operations into 16-bit floating point precision shaders in order to obtain the performance benefit of this mode with no image quality degradation. Our goal is to provide our consumers the best experience possible, and that means games must both look and run great. (How much time is a developer expected to spend special-case optimizing engines for hardware that does not fully conform to reference specs, or implements them in a near-unplayable fashion with what is trying to be accomplished from a creative standpoint? Regardless if it's the result of any failure in relations between Nvidia and Microsoft. How much grease is this gonna take? And downplaying the missing fog bug IMHO is a misstep. If the proper implementation of that fog would skew results unfavorably in the slightest---mind you, I can't say one way or another: I don't have these drivers, and I'm not a developer---how does one think they have ANY leeway whatsoever in their insistence such a driver should be used as part of a valid performance assessment, let alone providing the best possible experience? Maybe these drivers should be leaked and the general public could see for themselves where the numbers lie---and I chose that word for a reason---in their own evaluations? Quite frankly I feel that regardless of how true it may be that 16-bit FP precision and PS 1.4 are more economical, efficient codepaths in some instances without performance or IQ hit, telling a developer that after he's coded the damn thing around DX9 PS 2.0 reference calls and now has to push up the release date or burn some midnight oil just to make a wimpy pipeline look better is either inevitable devrel suicide or expensive. In any case, it's no excuse for the failure to measure up to all the spewed hype, let alone reference standards. The latter part of the above paragraph reads like "Sometimes, using earlier iterations of advanced features that happen to be part of the spec our product was ostensibly designed and hyped to the moon to support makes the game run much faster".) The optimal code path for ATI and NVIDIA GPUs is different - so trying to test them with the same code path will always disadvantage one or the other. The default settings for each game have been chosen by both the developers and NVIDIA in order to produce the best results for our consumers. (Looking at some preliminary results would tend to provide some contradictions to this latter assertion...a spoonful of truth, followed by a spoonful of bull****, perhaps? Nothing new under the sun in PR-speak...) In addition to the developer efforts, our driver team has developed a next-generation automatic shader optimizer that vastly improves GeForce FX pixel shader performance across the board. The fruits of these efforts will be seen in our Rel.50 driver release. Many other improvements have also been included in Rel.50, and these were all created either in response to, or in anticipation of the first wave of shipping DirectX 9 titles, such as Half Life 2. (Read this: "We're painfully aware our DX9 shader performance sucks bricks thru a straw compared to ATI's, although you won't EVER hear this from us, mind you, so we're adding the overhead of a translation layer to Cg function calls, thereby circumventing reference functionality thru our own brand of emulation." Now who doesn't think this translates to: a: reduced precision b: broken functionality with later DX requirements? The former might not matter more than a ****hole in a snowbank in many instances, the latter...who wants to spend $200-400+ on a piece of hardware that is not even immediately future-proof? ****! Come on, Brian! Perhaps if the hardware supported the API a little better upon inception, this last-minute, knees-bent running around looking for leaves big enough to cover your asses wouldn't be necessary. "I did it my way" worked for Sinatra. Indeed, we shall see how well this works for Nvidia.) We are committed to working with Gabe to fully understand his concerns and with Valve to ensure that 100+ million NVIDIA consumers get the best possible experience with Half Life 2 on NVIDIA hardware." (Calling Gabe's evaluation invalid *ESPECIALLY when fog doesn't work* is hardly a step in the right direction. It's laughable. There are no doubt good reasons in Gabe's mind why he chose not to use the Det 50's. The real question is, if the public were to see chapter and verse of these reasons, how do YOU think Nvidia would look in the eyes of the community, Brian? The million-dollar question is: "Did Valve optimize for ATI architecture at the expense of Nvidia?" If so, it's not like this sort of thing wasn't funded by Nvidia in the past, one's own medicine always tastes foul it seems. But really, if Valve's dev team was just using reference API calls, and this works better with ATI than with Nvidia---in fact it does, and this is supported by several benchmarks---and Nvidia hardware is just not measuring up, then perhaps Nvidia should throw some more time and money at Gabe et al to help them obtain more favorable results using proprietary codepaths, or STFU and go back to driver cheating which apparently is what they are prioritizing.) Brian Burke NVIDIA Corp. (Pixar on a single chip...so what if it takes as long to render a scene...;-) Maybe "something hallucinogenic to smoke" should be bundled with Nvidia cards...that way people could see the Emperor's New Clothes clear as day, right next to the pink elephants..."if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bull****" should be the corporate mantra of the millennium) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
I am certainly not offended by your post, But a I have to say that if you put this kind of conviction in everything you do then I
suspect you will be very successful. However, if you find this taking up every minute of your day, worrying about Nvidia and ATI then, Damn Dude turn off the juice and get out more. Wouldn't be weird if the picture appeared of both CEO's playing golf together again and Bill Gates was making it a threesome. "Dave" wrote in message news:zZb8b.420297$o%2.191281@sccrnsc02... I think we'll bother the ATI forum with this as well. Might hate me now, but you might thank me later... "Lee Marsh" wrote in message ... We have a response straight from NVIDIA addressing the recent storm that snip. Let's just schlep the whole statement right into this thread, shall we? Naturally, some accompanying pithy and more not-so-concise jabs (wouldn't be myself without them...). This is not a troll, nor a mission for me to lambaste Nvidia, although I do my share of it. I would really like to see them succeed, provided they knock off the BS. This is to point out some inconsistencies I see just jumping out of this statement. I read it four ****ing times, and each time, the same things hit me in the same place: night in the ruts, so here's some noise from those bruised jimmies, as I feel that this type of nonsense really underestimates people's intelligence... |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Blah, blah, blah.
Drivers, drivers, drivers..... YADA, YADA, YADA Dippity doo dah, dippity day... 'Crayz jig, in the middle of the street' It's already been stated, elsewhere (and NO I'm not going to supply references as this ****ing fanboy war has produced enough), that the nVidia hardware just does NOT cut it. Talk about drivers, all you want. If you want your card to run on drivers, alone.....have fun fanbois - Dave stood up at show-n-tell, in zZb8b.420297$o%2.191281@sccrnsc02, and said: I think we'll bother the ATI forum with this as well. Might hate me now, but you might thank me later... "Lee Marsh" wrote in message ... We have a response straight from NVIDIA addressing the recent storm that snip. Let's just schlep the whole statement right into this thread, shall we? Naturally, some accompanying pithy and more not-so-concise jabs (wouldn't be myself without them...). This is not a troll, nor a mission for me to lambaste Nvidia, although I do my share of it. I would really like to see them succeed, provided they knock off the BS. This is to point out some inconsistencies I see just jumping out of this statement. I read it four ****ing times, and each time, the same things hit me in the same place: night in the ruts, so here's some noise from those bruised jimmies, as I feel that this type of nonsense really underestimates people's intelligence... "Over the last 24 hours, there has been quite a bit of controversy over comments made by Gabe Newell of Valve at ATIs Shader Day. (Fun's just beginning. A whole can of worms has been opened to the masses WRT Nvidia actual DX9 shader performance) During the entire development of Half Life 2, NVIDIA has had close technical contact with Valve regarding the game. However, Valve has not made us aware of the issues Gabe discussed. (I reiterate: So much for close technical contact. But Brian, being the nice guy and PR flack he is---I wouldn't expect him to say much differently than all this.) We're confused as to why Valve chose to use Release. 45 (Rel. 45) - because up to two weeks prior to the Shader Day we had been working closely with Valve to ensure that Release 50 (Rel. 50) provides the best experience possible on NVIDIA hardware. (Missing fog, perhaps? Or maybe screenshot artificial augmentation? Or something else the general public is not privy to, that Nvidia might be exploiting for PR's sake on the basis of lack of commonly available info, and Gabe is a little more dignified at the moment to sling the big mudballs with specifics? Who would put it past Nvidia after all said and done?) Regarding the Half Life2 performance numbers that were published on the web, we believe these performance numbers are invalid because they do not use our Rel. 50 drivers. Engineering efforts on our Rel. 45 drivers stopped months ago in anticipation of Rel. 50. NVIDIA's optimizations for Half Life 2 and other new games are included in our Rel.50 drivers - which reviewers currently have a beta version of today. Rel. 50 is the best driver we've ever built - it includes significant optimizations for the highly-programmable GeForce FX architecture and includes feature and performance benefits for over 100 million NVIDIA GPU customers. (So, essentially we should use whichever optimized driver set provides the best performance with whichever game it was designed to speed up, regardless whether they' a: released to the public and b: WHQL certified? So what if it breaks performance and/or functionality with other things, or previously implemented workarounds? And stating that the 50's are the best set yet...sans fog...is a little ludicrous. Talk is cheap. Release the drivers RFN and let the people be the judge, if you dare...) Pending detailed information from Valve, we are only aware one bug with Rel. 50 and the version of Half Life 2 that we currently have - this is the fog issue that Gabe referred to in his presentation. It is not a cheat or an over optimization. Our current drop of Half Life 2 is more than 2 weeks old. NVIDIA's Rel. 50 driver will be public before the game is available. Since we know that obtaining the best pixel shader performance from the GeForce FX GPUs currently requires some specialized work, our developer technology team works very closely with game developers. Part of this is understanding that in many cases promoting PS 1.4 (DirectX 8) to PS 2.0 (DirectX 9) provides no image quality benefit. Sometimes this involves converting 32-bit floating point precision shader operations into 16-bit floating point precision shaders in order to obtain the performance benefit of this mode with no image quality degradation. Our goal is to provide our consumers the best experience possible, and that means games must both look and run great. (How much time is a developer expected to spend special-case optimizing engines for hardware that does not fully conform to reference specs, or implements them in a near-unplayable fashion with what is trying to be accomplished from a creative standpoint? Regardless if it's the result of any failure in relations between Nvidia and Microsoft. How much grease is this gonna take? And downplaying the missing fog bug IMHO is a misstep. If the proper implementation of that fog would skew results unfavorably in the slightest---mind you, I can't say one way or another: I don't have these drivers, and I'm not a developer---how does one think they have ANY leeway whatsoever in their insistence such a driver should be used as part of a valid performance assessment, let alone providing the best possible experience? Maybe these drivers should be leaked and the general public could see for themselves where the numbers lie---and I chose that word for a reason---in their own evaluations? Quite frankly I feel that regardless of how true it may be that 16-bit FP precision and PS 1.4 are more economical, efficient codepaths in some instances without performance or IQ hit, telling a developer that after he's coded the damn thing around DX9 PS 2.0 reference calls and now has to push up the release date or burn some midnight oil just to make a wimpy pipeline look better is either inevitable devrel suicide or expensive. In any case, it's no excuse for the failure to measure up to all the spewed hype, let alone reference standards. The latter part of the above paragraph reads like "Sometimes, using earlier iterations of advanced features that happen to be part of the spec our product was ostensibly designed and hyped to the moon to support makes the game run much faster".) The optimal code path for ATI and NVIDIA GPUs is different - so trying to test them with the same code path will always disadvantage one or the other. The default settings for each game have been chosen by both the developers and NVIDIA in order to produce the best results for our consumers. (Looking at some preliminary results would tend to provide some contradictions to this latter assertion...a spoonful of truth, followed by a spoonful of bull****, perhaps? Nothing new under the sun in PR-speak...) In addition to the developer efforts, our driver team has developed a next-generation automatic shader optimizer that vastly improves GeForce FX pixel shader performance across the board. The fruits of these efforts will be seen in our Rel.50 driver release. Many other improvements have also been included in Rel.50, and these were all created either in response to, or in anticipation of the first wave of shipping DirectX 9 titles, such as Half Life 2. (Read this: "We're painfully aware our DX9 shader performance sucks bricks thru a straw compared to ATI's, although you won't EVER hear this from us, mind you, so we're adding the overhead of a translation layer to Cg function calls, thereby circumventing reference functionality thru our own brand of emulation." Now who doesn't think this translates to: a: reduced precision b: broken functionality with later DX requirements? The former might not matter more than a ****hole in a snowbank in many instances, the latter...who wants to spend $200-400+ on a piece of hardware that is not even immediately future-proof? ****! Come on, Brian! Perhaps if the hardware supported the API a little better upon inception, this last-minute, knees-bent running around looking for leaves big enough to cover your asses wouldn't be necessary. "I did it my way" worked for Sinatra. Indeed, we shall see how well this works for Nvidia.) We are committed to working with Gabe to fully understand his concerns and with Valve to ensure that 100+ million NVIDIA consumers get the best possible experience with Half Life 2 on NVIDIA hardware." (Calling Gabe's evaluation invalid *ESPECIALLY when fog doesn't work* is hardly a step in the right direction. It's laughable. There are no doubt good reasons in Gabe's mind why he chose not to use the Det 50's. The real question is, if the public were to see chapter and verse of these reasons, how do YOU think Nvidia would look in the eyes of the community, Brian? The million-dollar question is: "Did Valve optimize for ATI architecture at the expense of Nvidia?" If so, it's not like this sort of thing wasn't funded by Nvidia in the past, one's own medicine always tastes foul it seems. But really, if Valve's dev team was just using reference API calls, and this works better with ATI than with Nvidia---in fact it does, and this is supported by several benchmarks---and Nvidia hardware is just not measuring up, then perhaps Nvidia should throw some more time and money at Gabe et al to help them obtain more favorable results using proprietary codepaths, or STFU and go back to driver cheating which apparently is what they are prioritizing.) Brian Burke NVIDIA Corp. (Pixar on a single chip...so what if it takes as long to render a scene...;-) Maybe "something hallucinogenic to smoke" should be bundled with Nvidia cards...that way people could see the Emperor's New Clothes clear as day, right next to the pink elephants..."if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bull****" should be the corporate mantra of the millennium) -- Strontium "It's no surprise, to me. I am my own worst enemy. `Cause every now, and then, I kick the livin' **** `outta me." - Lit |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"JAD" wrote in message nk.net... I am certainly not offended by your post, But a I have to say that if you put this kind of conviction in everything you do then I suspect you will be very successful. Actually, I am, in spite of myself...please don't tell anyone, wouldn't wanna spoil my carefully contrived bad image. ;-) However, if you find this taking up every minute of your day, worrying about Nvidia and ATI then, Damn Dude turn off the juice and get out more. I came, I saw, I read the statement, I gave my opinion, took me about five minutes to react and think, ten minutes to type, that's pretty much "all she wrote". I don't worry about much more than making a compelling argument here. Nvidia's future won't affect mine all too much, neither will ATI's. I dumped my Nvidia stock some time ago. Really, I don't worry very much about anything, despite appearances to the contrary. There are certainly far larger priorities to me than a video card company to worry about in any case. I may say a lot of the same things in the same places, but I'm not obsessive at all...just somewhat consistent. Wouldn't be weird if the picture appeared of both CEO's playing golf together again and Bill Gates was making it a threesome. I might be tempted to make it into a dartboard and market it...;-) snip. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Strontium" wrote in message ... Blah, blah, blah. Drivers, drivers, drivers..... YADA, YADA, YADA Dippity doo dah, dippity day... 'Crayz jig, in the middle of the street' It's already been stated, elsewhere (and NO I'm not going to supply references as this ****ing fanboy war has produced enough), that the nVidia hardware just does NOT cut it. Talk about drivers, all you want. If you want your card to run on drivers, alone.....have fun fanbois I'd think ANY card wouldn't run worth crap without drivers |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
-
Dave stood up at show-n-tell, in TBc8b.421235$Ho3.66910@sccrnsc03, and said: "JAD" wrote in message nk.net... I am certainly not offended by your post, But a I have to say that if you put this kind of conviction in everything you do then I suspect you will be very successful. Actually, I am, in spite of myself...please don't tell anyone, wouldn't wanna spoil my carefully contrived bad image. ;-) However, if you find this taking up every minute of your day, worrying about Nvidia and ATI then, Damn Dude turn off the juice and get out more. I came, I saw, I read the statement, I gave my opinion, took me about five minutes to react and think, ten minutes to type, that's pretty much "all she wrote". I don't worry about much more than making a compelling argument here. Or, starting a flamewar? Pffffff! If it was so 'blase', to you, why in the Hell did you decide to x-post propoganda? The only reason possible is that you get off on starting arguments. As knowledgeable as you put yourself forth to be about both cards, it would seem you've read both of these groups. And, in so knowing, that such a post would incite a flamewar. So, drop the 'innocent' act. The fact that you knew this group, pretty much nails that. Nvidia's future won't affect mine all too much, neither will ATI's. I dumped my Nvidia stock some time ago. Really, I don't worry very much about anything, despite appearances to the contrary. There are certainly far larger priorities to me than a video card company to worry about in any case. I may say a lot of the same things in the same places, but I'm not obsessive at all...just somewhat consistent. Then, why make a point to x-post something that is sure to start a flamewar? Wouldn't be weird if the picture appeared of both CEO's playing golf together again and Bill Gates was making it a threesome. I might be tempted to make it into a dartboard and market it...;-) You seem crafted, in the art of 'controversy'. Maybe, one day, someone will be throwing darts at 'your' head snip. -- Strontium "It's no surprise, to me. I am my own worst enemy. `Cause every now, and then, I kick the livin' **** `outta me." - Lit |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
- Mark Leuck stood up at show-n-tell, in JIc8b.322583$Oz4.112906@rwcrnsc54, and said: "Strontium" wrote in message ... Blah, blah, blah. Drivers, drivers, drivers..... YADA, YADA, YADA Dippity doo dah, dippity day... 'Crayz jig, in the middle of the street' It's already been stated, elsewhere (and NO I'm not going to supply references as this ****ing fanboy war has produced enough), that the nVidia hardware just does NOT cut it. Talk about drivers, all you want. If you want your card to run on drivers, alone.....have fun fanbois I'd think ANY card wouldn't run worth crap without drivers Cute joke, but not very good. I said 'alone' (i.e. minus hardware, for the illiterate). -- Strontium "It's no surprise, to me. I am my own worst enemy. `Cause every now, and then, I kick the livin' **** `outta me." - Lit |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Strontium" wrote in message ... Blah, blah, blah. Drivers, drivers, drivers..... YADA, YADA, YADA Dippity doo dah, dippity day... 'Crayz jig, in the middle of the street' Thank you, drive thru...I suppose this is your copout for not having anything meaningful to add? And now, predictably enough, you'll become petulant and insulting, right? Come on. You know you want to. Humor me. Beyatch. ;-) It's already been stated, elsewhere (and NO I'm not going to supply references as this ****ing fanboy war has produced enough), that the nVidia hardware just does NOT cut it. Perhaps not in HL2, but let's take a look at the OpenGL picture, shall we? My rant was specifically targeted, not representative of my general overview. And it was not intended to start a fanboi flamefest, contrary to the abject ignorance of some folks. Talk about drivers, all you want. If you want your card to run on drivers, alone.....have fun fanbois Seems it went right over your head. Your hair ain't parted in the middle from all those near misses, perchance, is it? If you think I'm a fanboi, I think you need to get a life and a clue, not necessarily in that order. You might find them in Aisle 6 in Wal-Mart. For the record, I'm playing a common 'tater, with agi 'tater tendencies. Oh, and BTW, as far as drivers are concerned, seems cards won't run very well without them, now imagine that! What else do they run on? Fossil fuels? A pile of ammonium dichromate with a magnesium ribbon as a wick? Maybe some of yer C17 H21 NO4? Heh! ;-) If that were the case, maybe HL2 would run faster... |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Strontium" wrote in message ... - Dave stood up at show-n-tell, in TBc8b.421235$Ho3.66910@sccrnsc03, and said: snip I came, I saw, I read the statement, I gave my opinion, took me about five minutes to react and think, ten minutes to type, that's pretty much "all she wrote". I don't worry about much more than making a compelling argument here. Or, starting a flamewar? Pffffff! Nope. Bzzt, wrong. Thank you for playing, Next contestant, please. Who was the first to hop on the bandwagon and flame me so far? You. Says a lot for you, eh? ;-) If that was indeed my intent, you played oh so conveniently right into my scheme in a very timely fashion no less. That would make you a fish. I dangled my johnson, and you jumped right into the car and stuck your head immediately in my lap. Sucker! I repeat: if that was my intent. If it was so 'blase', to you, why in the Hell did you decide to x-post propoganda? Propaganda? ROTFL. Perhaps the truth as seen from the eyes of a consummate cynic, but I'd really like to see you prove conclusively that anything I've stated wasn't just my opinion based on how Nvidia's official response appeared to me based on track record and established fact. I'm not terribly concerned about who it influences. There goes your propaganda schtick. The only reason possible is that you get off on starting arguments. So why, pray tell, are you sitting there taking knee-jerk potshots at me, other than to provide me with amusement? Please, do tell...oh, let me guess, you reflexively felt the urge to flame me, is that it? Silly wabbit... "Your five minutes is up" "No it isn't" "Yes it is" "Then why are you still arguing with me?" "I am not" "Yes you are..." Your deductive reasoning could use a little work, my friend... As knowledgeable as you put yourself forth to be about both cards, I don't claim to be. I offer opinion, I offer advice, every now and then someone gets from me what they're begging for, but not without (my own brand of perhaps demented) humor. Constructive criticism can take many forms. Sometimes it comes down to "where there's a whip, there's a way". But if you see something that's flat-out wrong, perhaps you can correct me in a nice, constructive fashion that is conducive to rational discussion, that is, if you're at all capable of something more than trite hypocrisy. Feel free. Surprise me. Elevate thy stature a little beyond the mundane and all-too-boringly predictable. If you continue to wallow in banality by insisting upon reducing a potential discussion into another typical, silly flamefest, I'll just ignore you: I really don't feel like wasting my time with such a monochromatic viewpoint. it would seem you've read both of these groups. And, in so knowing, that such a post would incite a flamewar. So, drop the 'innocent' act. The fact that you knew this group, pretty much nails that. I've been in and out of here for many years and seen the best and the worst. If my opinion incites a flamewar, there's nothing I can do to compensate for people's lack of understanding, now is there? If that's the way you choose to view things, then I challenge you to step outside of the context of your skewed opinion and take a good, long objective look at what's really going on behind the scenes. Or don't. Not my problem in either case. I can live quite comfortably with my opinion. Question is, can you? Nvidia's future won't affect mine all too much, neither will ATI's. I dumped my Nvidia stock some time ago. Really, I don't worry very much about anything, despite appearances to the contrary. There are certainly far larger priorities to me than a video card company to worry about in any case. I may say a lot of the same things in the same places, but I'm not obsessive at all...just somewhat consistent. Then, why make a point to x-post something that is sure to start a flamewar? It is an issue that is germane to both groups. The foibles of human nature are not my concern here. Wouldn't be weird if the picture appeared of both CEO's playing golf together again and Bill Gates was making it a threesome. I might be tempted to make it into a dartboard and market it...;-) You seem crafted, in the art of 'controversy'. That was not my intent. My intent was to promote discussion. If it takes the shape of a flamefest, it's just typical Usenet for ya. If you react this way to strong opinions as a matter of course, perhaps you shouldn't read things that provoke you thusly...or maybe *you* just like milking your anxiety gradient for kicks, I dunno... Maybe, one day, someone will be throwing darts at 'your' head The search for fame and recognition is not exactly on my "to do" list this year. However, if someone would like to throw darts at my picture, any publicity is good publicity I suppose...;-) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Strontium" wrote in message ... Cute joke, but not very good. I said 'alone' (i.e. minus hardware, for the illiterate). Nice try, but the phrase "If you want your card to run on drivers, alone" presumes the existence of a card running on something, right? Not all your fault, really. You were a chem major, not an English major, I'm assuming...your concept of literacy appears rather vague here. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
pc problems after g card upgrade + sp2 | ben reed | Homebuilt PC's | 9 | November 30th 04 01:04 AM |
Asus A7N8X-X and AMD Athlon XP 3200+ | Information Scavenger | Asus Motherboards | 30 | November 9th 04 09:30 PM |
I dont see that nvidia is "finished"... | Steven C \(Doktersteve\) | Ati Videocards | 17 | September 13th 03 09:00 PM |
Tomb Raider AOD benches: Bad news for Nvidia | who be dat? | Ati Videocards | 33 | September 4th 03 10:35 AM |
Kyle Bennett (HardOCP) blasts NVIDIA | Radeon350 | Ati Videocards | 12 | August 13th 03 09:19 PM |