I am a user of both linux and windows. I have found in my many long hours sitting in front of my computer that Windows is not for everyone... and neither is linux. now on the topic of this new corona thing... ok so MS is making this new codec.. they asked ATI and NVIDIA to be apart of this kewl new tech. big deal.. if you run linux.. buy a Matrox they work very nicely and they function exceptionaly well in linux.. If you are a big gamer and want those happy NVIDIA cards BUY windows and play your games.
Read it carefully the new codec is supposed to outperform your happy DivX and at a smaller file size meaning that you are not using this codec to watch DVD's it is for people who are already ripping DVD's and other videos...
Knowing linux users around the world they will want a piece of that action and take steps to use the new DX9/Corona.. my philosophy for linux has always been if there isn't something avail for the project you are looking for.. write it yourself.. Neither linux nor windows is better. they both have their happy features... I used to be annoyed about not being able to use "hardware X" on my linux box.. times have changed and companies like Creative have taken steps to hire programmers to write drivers for linux.
ok this has been a bit long winded.. but i felt my $0.02 was worth throwing into the bucket..

Good post, qain.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

Sorry for the ignorance on my part, but....

Granted MS pushing hardware manufactures to back this codec, but if it becomes mainstream, do you thing it will be ported to another platform? I mean there are alot of intelegent programers out there that can probably reverse engineer the codec, and incorporate it in to some sort of player. Windows, Linux, OSX, BeOS...I mean if I were a programmer and seen if this codec made me say 'Wow, this is great/fantastic.' I would then say 'I wonder how if it can work on this plaform' and then try to port it over to my preference of platform. Who cares what the most 'popular' platform is. Take the challenge and port it to your platform of choice.

Example of codec on multi platforms.. DivX.. at least 3.11 ;-) is used on multiple platforms.. and i believe mac has a "3ivX" which is more or less the same thing but i'm not too sure on that..

3ivx is something else entirely although 4.x and 5.x divx is available for mac and linux i'm not sure if 3.x is.

Would be nice if the video cards supported all iso compliant mpeg4 as well. (Xvid Divx5) As for hardware audio codec support I would think mp3 would be a must. If wma is going in hardware I would like it to be in my soundcard and not my videocard. Games are going to choking it enough in the future if I want to listen to music I'd like to be able to do it and play games at a decent frame rate.

You guys are so concerned that MS codecs will only work properly in MS operating systems. "Oh NO! I won't be able to use Microsoft's R&D in Linux!" Your video card will still work in other OS's .... it just won't be able to take advantage of better technology because "MR Linux" can't further technology like "MR Gates". Quit bashing MS, just install Windows and take advantage of REAL technology.

Has nothing to do with better technology, and all to do with patents, and hardware that's useless unless it's used in an illegal OS.

It has nothing to do with technology but everything to do with patents? How much are you paying for linux? probably $0...that's exactly how much money a linux developer has to create and pay for patents and support, and new technology advancement. Enjoy the OS of your choice, I know I enjoy mine.

'scuse me? $0? no. I believe in supporting the people that provide me with quality goods. I paid $59.00 for my O/S thx.

Nice...too bad not all linux users feel that way.

Fewt, what "illegal OS"? You know for a fact the OS is NOT illegal, just some of the tactics used have been deemed illegal, NOT the OS itself. I know we differ on this, as I see it as "the person using the gun to kill is guilty, not the gun". You see it as the OS is guilty of what the humans have done, which is silly.
You also know the video cards won't be "Made for Windows OS ONLY". The new codecs will be included along side all the other instructions in the cards, just like the "optimized for P4" or "optimized for 3dNOW!" in different programs. The programs are supposed to work "better" on the chip it is optimized for, but still works on other chips, correct?

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

James, are automatic weapons illegal in the US? Why?

All I'm looking for is confirmation that the codecs will be available to anyone that wants to leverage them in their app on any O/S they write it for. It's not too much to ask for.

Fewt, you asked "James, are automatic weapons illegal in the US? Why?"

I firmly believe it is because the HUMANS can't use them responsibly, as a full automatic weapon, fully loaded, can do NOTHING without a human making it. THAT is the point I am trying to make- the software should not be to blame, but the person making it do the "bad things". Like the virus writer should be punished, not program. The program would not have come about if it weren't for the human that made it.

On a side note, it seems to many people forget things like that; sue the gun maker for some idiot using the gun to kill, or let's blast MS for someone doing bad with their software.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

MS has not used Windows responsible, and instead have illegaly tied code into it. Sure, the OS itself is not illegal, the fact is however that it is "dirty". ;-)

I think I can quite safely confirm for you that the codecs will NOT be available for every OS in existance. Or did you mean just the most popular OS'? In which case yes, the OS which is most popular on the desktop will indeed have the codecs =)

Most popular O/S's meaning the O/S's the vendors already provide drivers for. Who's to say Windows is "the most popular" O/S? MS moves the most product by OEM, not retail box. Maybe you are referring to most popular being the OEM's favorite O/S? Most people don't care what O/S is on their computer as long as they turn it on, and it works.

Just FYI, the answer is "No, automatic weapons are not illegal in the US".

They are restricted to persons holding a valid license for them, just like driving a car is resticted to persons holding a valid license for that.

ok, bad example. That varies state to state though doesn't it?

Okay, from what I remember is that you can own a whole automatic weapon without a license but one part isn't included that is REQUIRED to have the gun fire. I believe it is the receiver but I cannot be sure since I am not a gun expert but I have seen the kits in magazines for building a Colt M16A Assault Rifle (again, without the part) and then you need a license to buy a full gun or just the stripped part itself. They are legal to shoot but the ammo isn't exactly the cheapest and it does fire at a fast enough rate that you'd be better off burning your money.

But that's just asinine. Why would a long-time windows user pay $59 for an O.S. that they don't know that they will like but are willing to try. I downloaded Linux to try it out but need a system to do just that. If it is worth the money for me to purchase it instead of using this (I'd have to do the hefty migration over to linux as well.)

The moral of the post: Not everyone is willing to pay money for something that they have never used but heard rave things about.

No.

Automatic weapons are regulated under Federal law (rather than state law)

Possession of a Class III federal firearms permit will allow you to legally possess fully automatic weapons regardless of state or local law.

I was referring to the "most popular [OS] on the desktop", and yes I believe it can be said quite safely that Windows is the most popular.

I disagree, there is no substantial proof that Windows is the most popular. In order to prove it most popular, it would have to be on even ground with it's competition which it clearly is not. It is on desktops because MS contracted OEM's to put it there, not because the average joe asked for it. "Joe" doesn't care what's on his computer as long as he can read the news, and get his email.

Well then I am mistaken. ;-)

I think the whole free software idea is great. I think it's great that you can download the O/S for free, and if you like it have the option of buying the next version in support of the company that manufacturered it. My question though is this, how did you try *your first version* of Windows before purchasing it? (legally) ;-)

hahahaha, aaaaaahahahahaha....
Sorry fewt you crack me up as usual ;)

Linux is definetly the most popular os on the planet, nobody even knows what windows is, right?

This forum would be boring without you fewt...;)

Supporting the company that produced the product is great...unfortunately, given the option, most people will not do it (I don't care what someone says...if given the option, people will keep their $59). That's why your precious linux company doesn't have the leverage to win over hardware manufacturers or, "patents", if you prefer.

That's pretty funny, too bad I didn't imply that. What I really implied is that MS may not be where they are today had they played by the rules. The forum itself is actually pretty pathetic IMHO, it looks more like MSSlashdot every day.

No, illegal OEM contracts are the real reason linux companies (as well as DR-DOS PC-DOS GEOWORKS BEOS OS/2 etc ended up dead), lets open our eyes just a bit, and face the facts.

Does the government watch you through your TV screen fewt?

No, but they are probably reading your email.

"I disagree"... No suprise there =)

"In order to prove it most popular, it would have to be on even ground with it's competition"... Why is that? I don't see why popularity of anything has to do with being on even ground with competitors. It's the most popular (on desktops) because it is used by more people that any other OS.

"It is on desktops because MS contracted OEM's to put it there, not because the average joe asked for it."... I never went into the details on WHY Windows is the most popular, or how it became the most popular, I simply stated that it is.

Can anyone get a Class 3 federal firearms permit? Or do you have to be a police officer, security guard etc etc?

"Why is that? I don't see why popularity of anything has to do with being on even ground with competitors."

Everyone having it doesn't make it popular. Everyone here has a cold, by your logic colds must be popular.

Being a police officer/security guard woudl have nothing to do with it.

Class III Federal Firearms permits are a type of gun dealer permit, and if I recall correctly, were never too terribly difficult to get. Though I'm pretty sure they were hellishly expensive.

Been a while since I looked into it (was only ever a matter of curiosity) but I;m pretty sure the BATF web page should have some information on it. Local gun clubs/gun dealers should have some info too as you often have to have a weapon shipped from a Class III dealter to a Class III dealer when purchasing/shipping across state lines.

Fewt you posted "No, illegal OEM contracts..."

Once again, those OEMs that agreed to the contracts are (IMO) are the guilty party, the sell-outs. I have the ONE sollution that would stop all the crap about "illegal OEM contracts"- Make ALL OEMs pay the same exact price per license, with no volumn discounts. Same with ALL software and hardware. That way, no one pays more, no one gets special deals, which will "restore competition".

Sorry, just a sore point with me, since I am one of those OEMs that never signed one of those contracts, so I can build whatever the hell I want, with or without an OS, or any OS I want, without any "MS Tax" as people put it. I may be a "small one person store", but I am STILL CONSIDERED AN OEM.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

I don't agree that the prices should be fixed, however the prices should be published and available to anyone that wants them, and no two companies should get a different rate per same volume moved. :-)

Let's be fair here fewt.

There is no evidence that any of those (including Linux) would have done any better in the absence of the OEM agreements. So in your statement, the OEM agreements are one POSSIBLE reason for the bad performance/failure/death of those other products.
You could just as well state that they would have all failed even if the OEM agreements never existed.

If I start running and you get in my way and stop me, I can claim "If you hadn't stopped me I would have set a world record"....but that's all it is, a claim.

Would those other products have succeeded if it wasn't for the OEM agreements? Maybe. Maybe not. No evidence one way or the other.

Uhh, if memory serves, DR-DOS/GeoWorks and MS-DOS/Windows were at one time both supported by the OEM on the same hardware. GeoWorks and OS/2 could well have survived had MS not contracted them off of the desktop.

I really first began to use Windows back in '98 and had a perfectly legal copy due to being a computer novice back in those days (reminiscing :D.) But that's beyond the point.

I wouldn't pay for Linux unless I think it is definately worth my money. Unless it's something revolutionary and I NEED to have it . . . I don't see a reason fit to buy it.

Right... so...
Everyone having a yo-yo... doesn't make yo-yo's popular.
Everyone having a scooter... doesn't make scooters popular.
Everyone having a psx... doesn't make psx's popular.
Everyone having pokemon trading cards... doesn't make pokemon trading cards popular.
... etc.

Wether or not Company X had a monopoly in yo-yo's (when they were hugely popular) doesn't detract from the fact that they were popular, or in fact the most popular at that time.

Are you forced to buy a yo-yo everytime you go to the toystore? There's a great difference there, and it's shocking that you just don't get it.

hm...I don't know about you, but I'm never forced to buy windows when I walk into a computer store. But...imagine the headaches a typical new computer buyer will get when he walks into the computer store and sees a computer he likes, salesperson says:

"well you can get this computer with either Windows, various Linux destributions, BeOS, or OS/2. Oh but depending on what operating system you pick for this computer, we'll have to change some hardware, and certain programs will never work for you depending on your decision, also we have a variety of 400-800 page books for you to learn your new system with"

oh wait...nevermind because you're expecting hardware manufacturers and software developers to make their product work with EVERYTHING flawlessly. We should have 20 OS's out there, they'll cost $20 each, but you'll need one of each to make sure all the programs work ;)

You do realize that they are just as confused now as they would be if they had a choice. What your comment tells me is that you'd rather people didn't have a choice.

And here i thought we were talking about what is and what is not the most popular os on the desktop.

We were. Here's the deal, if you don't want choice move to china. Don't tread on my rights to choice.

I don't know about you...but I'm not forced to buy Windows when I walk into CompUSA, and nobody else is forced to buy it. I'm not even forced to buy a computer preloaded with windows, and neither are you. I personally don't want to have an option of 20 operating systems....I don't care if the OS will cost $20 and never crash...I can't run 80% of the programs out there because the developers don't have the time or money to create software for 20 OS's. And for the people that don't care if certain programs work on their PC or not, you have linux. It's not like you don't have a choice, so stop making it sound like that.

"I personally don't want to have an option of 20 operating systems...."

Tough. I thought you people were capitalists. The truth comes out now, you NBM'ers are as communist as they come. Lemme define a few things for you, in black and white.

"1. What is capitalism?
Capitalism is a social system based on the principle of individual rights. The term capitalism is used here in the broader philosophical political sense, and not in the narrower economic sense, i.e. a free-market." - http://www.capitalism.org/

I demand that my right to choose, don't like it then move to a socialist country where you belong. Don't tread on me. I don't care if there are 20 or 100 OS's to choose from, I want that choice, period.

"I can't run 80% of the programs out there because the developers don't have the time or money to create software for 20 OS's."

If they wrote good code it would not be a problem. I have apps today that will run unchanged on more than 20 OS's.

"It's not like you don't have a choice, so stop making it sound like that."

Choice is going to best buy and picking a computer, upon bringing that computer home that computer asks which one (or many) of a variety of OS's and removes the others. Choice is going to the ford dealership and being offered a 4, 6, or 8 cyl engine. Choice is NOT "build it yourself", "build it yourself" is way too technical for 9/10th of PC users. You know this though don't you. Don't play me for a fool, your pretended ignorance win't get you anyware.

"If they wrote good code it would not be a problem. I have apps today that will run unchanged on more than 20 OS's."

well if you don't mind me asking...what the hell are you complaining about???

what...you want everyone to feel the same as you then?? Sorry fewt, it's time for you to come to the realization that everybody is not the same as you.

>"If they wrote good code it would not be a problem. I have apps today that will run unchanged on
> more than 20 OS's."
>well if you don't mind me asking...what the hell are you complaining about???

You know exactly what I'm complaining about, there needs to be choice available when consumers buy computers. The "build it yourself" line is a bunch of crap, and you know it which is why you haven't gone back to it.

>what...you want everyone to feel the same as you then?? Sorry fewt, it's time for you to come to
> the realization that everybody is not the same as you.

No, what you need to realize is that people have the right to choose and your opinion that we don't need choices would violate my freedom of choice. It's an argument you can't win so you don't really need to make yourself look any worse. I do not want the world to be the same as me, however you seem to be of the opinion that it should be the same as you (you explicitly stated so below). Maybe you'd be happy if we standardized on one O/S, one engine, one sport, one job, one food, but I'm not into being a drone.

I'm not in America, hence you hardly have to worry about me treading on your so called "rights".

And just to let you know, I'm all for choice, I have no problems with there being several different OS's out there (would 100's be fairly accurate), in fact I think it's a great thing because they all have their pros and cons. Just like programming languages, there isn't a single os out there that is the jack of all trades.

However, I do believe that standardization can be a good thing in some cases (not all cases, but some). The desktop OS *may* be one of these cases.

My point exactly....as you just said... *could* have survived. In other words, might have survived, or might not have.

I was just pointing out the flip side to your earlier comments which claimed that Microsoft was THE reason they failed. Microsoft may have been *A* factor, but they were not the only factor by a long shot. When you look at the other factors, it's quite likely that most of them would have failed no matter what Microsoft did.

Prove it, many of these companies were doing very well until MS broke the law.

Yes, in some cases IE between 4 walls, within an entire organisation. Not an entire market.

Listen Mr. freedom fighter....all I'm saying is that the computer industry NEEDS a standard...there are plenty of places that sell PC's with a linux OS on them, and it's not hard to find a MAC....and recently pc's with no OS at all have been popping up. So no, I still don't understand why you're complaining, obviously the choice is there...and you yourself said you have programs that run on 20 different OS's...so what seems to be the problem fewt? I'm not trying to take anybody's right to choose away, explain to me how it would be beneficial to consumers to have 20 different os's on any given PC and be able to chose one at boot? What will happen to all the programs that come with the PC and that the customer bought to use if he accidentaly chooses an OS that doesn't work with any of the stuff he just bought? No...software developers already have a hard enough time creating software for JUST windows and having it work with all the hardware (even with directx doing most of the work for them)...it's not going to be "easy", as you say, to make something work with 20 different OS's that use many different api's.

Sure, it needs a standard. All OS's should be able to run the same middleware. No you have to throw FUD into the mix, how would it be incompatable with his computer if the OEM preconfigured it? Software developers have a hard time moving software between platforms because they initially saved money using the windows API. They took the easy way out, and now the consumer suffers for it. They will get no sympathy from me. Sure I have software that runs on 20 platforms, and the scary part is that I'm not even a developer and I managed to write it.

'nuff said.

"Sure I have software that runs on 20 platforms, and the scary part is that I'm not even a developer and I managed to write it."

Let me guess... you wrote something in Perl and suddenly you're an expert in developing software to the point where all the middleware should be able to be run on every platform. Tell you what, when you've written something a bit more complex than an advanced shell script in perl and perl only, I'll put your opinions on software development on the side. That's like a lawyer coming in and telling us how software should be written!

Enough said.

"Let me guess... you wrote something in Perl and suddenly you're an expert in developing software to the point where all the middleware should be able to be run on every platform. Tell you what, when you've written something a bit more complex than an advanced shell script in perl and perl only, I'll put your opinions on software development on the side. That's like a lawyer coming in and telling us how software should be written! "

Funny, I thought Perl was a programming language just as any other, especially since it can be compiled and GUI apps can be built with it (Probably your definition of an application.). Do you consider it a scripting language simply because it's multiplatform? Then C would also be a scripting language right? There are many full on applications written in Perl. It graduated from being a scripting language at roughly the same time that VB matured into more than a toy. How complex does a script have to be before it becomes an application? you want lines of code? My average so called "script" is over 1,000 lines and compiled. My largest is well over 4,000 and runs unchanged on the *5 platforms* that I have compiled it on (including Win32). Maybe it's user interaction that sets a script aside from an application huh? Well, you can telnet to it, it will create a socket, and then it will interact with you. Hmmm sounds like an application to me. It's not hard to write an app that works on many systems the big boys do it every day. (IBM comes to mind.) Maybe if you became a real programmer instead of hanging out here trying to make prople like me look bad you'd learn how to write portable code yourself.

Lemme share some fine examples of it being more than a simple scripting language.

http://www.frozen-bubble.org/
http://www.cscmail.net/index2.shtml
http://www.perlbox.org/

'nuff said

There's nothing I need to prove. I'm the one keeping the open mind and saying that they might have survived, and might not have.

You are the one taking the definitive position adn sayign that they would not have failed except for Microsoft.

Since you are the taking the definitive position....you prove it.

Prove that they would not have failed except for Microsoft.

Wow. I guess that means that you are actively lobbying against the new and used car industries in the US, the power utilites, local state and federal taxes, the airline industry, and all of the other areas of business in which different rates are negotiated for different people even if they recive the exact identical product.

Oh go play your "I'm an idiot" game somewhere else.

"VB matured into more than a toy"
When did VB mature into more than a toy? It really can't be held any higher than being a really fast RAD tool for prototyping.

"Then C would also be a scripting language right?"
ANSI C is multi-platform, however in reality I thnk you will find that very little c code will compile on multiple platforms without having to be modified or re-written.

"you want lines of code?"
Nope, any developer will tell you this is a completely meaningless number that can only be used to impress people unaware of that fact.

"It's not hard to write an app that works on many systems the big boys do it every day. (IBM comes to mind.)"
If it's not that hard why isn't everyone doing it? Well because windowing systems work very differently on different platforms (part of the failure of Java's Swing framework), threading models differ etc etc.

"Maybe if you became a real programmer..."
Yes sorry, I'll try to be more like you. Maybe you should start giving legal advice to the big companies too, ooh and maybe you should do the accounting for them too, after all you must know everything.

Yup, you did quite well circling around the meat of my comment, didn't you. lol

>"VB matured into more than a toy"
>When did VB mature into more than a toy? It really can't be held any higher
> than being a really fast RAD tool for prototyping.

Some time ago, roughly v6. Though I understand that it doesn't support threads, when even a "scripting language" like Perl does.

>"Then C would also be a scripting language right?"
>ANSI C is multi-platform, however in reality I thnk you will find that very
> little c code will compile on multiple platforms without having to be
> modified or re-written.

So is it a scripting language or not? Ansi C can be compiled with minimal changes on many platforms, is that not correct?

>"you want lines of code?"
>Nope, any developer will tell you this is a completely meaningless number
> that can only be used to impress people unaware of that fact.

No kidding? Well, what does define an application then? Please Mr holier than thou, do tell.

>"It's not hard to write an app that works on many systems the big boys do
>it every day. (IBM comes to mind.)"
>If it's not that hard why isn't everyone doing it? Well because windowing
>systems work very differently on different platforms (part of the failure
>of Java's Swing framework), threading models differ etc etc.

One word: LAZINESS

Netscape is doing it, IBM is doing it, Adobe is doing it, Sun is doing it, Oracle is doing it. There are no other excuses, unless you are lazy you are doing it.

>"Maybe if you became a real programmer..."
>Yes sorry, I'll try to be more like you. Maybe you should start giving
>legal advice to the big companies too, ooh and maybe you should do the
>accounting for them too, after all you must know everything.

No, not quite everything.

As always, we seat fewt resorts to name calling an dinsults whenever he gets backed into a corner and proven wrong or is forced to face his on self-contradictions.

He loves to try to portray himself a "pro-capitalism" and then comes out with things like this that are 100% in contradiction of that position.

:o)

That's funny, I'm not calling you any names. *YET*

Interesting that you still have chosen to not respond to the content of the post.

How do you reconcile your pro-capitalist position with your illegal restriction of trade proposal here "however the prices should be published and available to anyone that wants them, and no two companies should get a different rate per same volume moved. "

MS has been found guilty of using it's monopoly Windows product to leverage OEM's, as punishment MS should be required to charge fixed published fixed rates for the next 5 years. The concept of charging fixed rates is as anti-capitalistic as the menu at McDonalds. No one is telling anyone how much they can charge, only that they can not charge me less because I bought 999 BigMacs and put a pickle on every one without exception.

"One word: LAZINESS

Netscape is doing it, IBM is doing it, Adobe is doing it, Sun is doing it, Oracle is doing it. There are no other excuses, unless you are lazy you are doing it. "

Metaphorically speaking to you everything is a nail and all you have is a hammer.

Some of us software developers don't have the luxury of using a “portable” scripting language. Some programs such as games rely on the low-level api’s and hardware to gain every bit of performance from a computer. Apparently I was lazy for re-writing our blitters in Assembler since they were not portable. How about device drivers, let’s write them in TCL.

While I agree that some applications require low level code (such as drivers) the majority of applications the world currently enjoys does not, and can be written to be portable. As far as games are concerned, there are several games on the market today that run on multiple platforms. These games couldn't have been complete rewrites. ;-) (Quake III, and Wolfenstein come to mind.)

Fewt, you asked "My question though is this, how did you try *your first version* of Windows before purchasing it? (legally) ;-) "

I tried my first Windows OS on my dad's system- Win 3.0. Before that, pre-windows, was the family Sinclair ZX 80, then Vic20, the C64, Apple IIe at school.
After win3.0, I went to 95 versions, 98 versions, NT4, 2000, now XP.
On the Linux side, I have tried many different distros. Lycoris seems to be the best so far that I have seen, and I am eagerly waiting for the full release of RedHat 7.3 to try (as the beta is pretty good so far).

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

Fewt, YOU are the one making the claim that the reason those companies are out is because of Microsoft (making it sound like Microsoft's fault alone. YOU come up with Proof of that- and just saying "MS had illegal contracts" or whatever won't do it. That does not "prove" anything about why the other businesses went down. And to be honest, I don't consider one warning in a BETA product about "this may not work with DR Dos, being a beta product" as any kind of proof.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

Fewt, you posted "MS has been found guilty of using it's monopoly Windows product to leverage OEM's".
Ok, since you can post that, can you post WHAT was done that was MS FAULT ALONE? I mean, the OEMs signed those contracts, with full knowledge of what they meant (you know they have lawyers to read those things, right?). So, what did they do to the OEMs? Looks to me like the OEMs did all that to THEMSELVES, and to get in better with consumers, now want to say "we didn't know", or "we were forced".

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

We had a VIC-20 first, but I wasn't really into it. Once we picked up the C64 in 1983 it was a different story though. From there, I couldn't begin to count my computers. There was one point in time where I had over 20 systems all running at the same time haha.

Look at the current trial, they were found guilty. They settled the caldera case out of court for hundreds of millions of dollars. (You don't settle for hundreds of millions if you aren't guilty.)

MS wrote the contracts, and dangled $10-$15 discounts over their heads. How can say Gateway afford to pay $15.00 more than say Dell, and compete? It may not sound like much, but $15.00 per box when you are moving 10,000 systems a day works out to $150,000 per day in savings! It's enough to make or break a company that is already working on sales at 2-3 points per system. MS had them by the gonads. Sure, they could have chosen not to sign them, but not if they wanted to stay in business.

Fewt, you posted this:"Look at the current trial, they were found guilty".
That says absolutely nothing to me about showing me point-blank "MS did THIS, and where *PROVEN* guilty". Details, man, Details! LOL

Also, "settling out of court" doesn't mean guilty or not, and you know it. The damn school up here in my area "settled out of court" for over $100,000 on something they could have won in court. Like I said, doesn't mean anything about guilty or not.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com
(hey, this "arguing for the heck of it" can be a stress release! no wonder you enjoy it so much!)

So what if they get that "$15 discount" or not. If they *thought* the contracts were illegal (like they are tried saying during the trial) then they SHOULD NOT HAVE SIGNED! I can get those discounts if I want, but I do not want to be locked in on how I can do things, so I DON'T. If the big OEMs can't see past the $$$$, then they should keep their damn mouths shut about "we were forced", and should not be believed about "being on the side of the consumer".

By the way, where does it state MS was *Convicted* of illegal contracts, instead of just "accused"? "Look at the current trial" won't do, either.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com
(this arguing is getting kinda fun!)

I'm sorry, but yes it was part of the current ruling against them.

There's no need for details, however if you are a gluttin for punishment I'll provide the whole text for you to read. ;-)

http://www.msnbc.com/mod...ocs/062801microsoft.pdf
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm

Fewt, this is some from your "findings of fact":
1) The fact that IBM no longer tries to compete with Windows is evidenced by the fact that it prices OS/2 Warp at about two-and-one-half times the price of Windows 98
2) 48. The applications barrier to entry does not prevent non-Microsoft, Intel-compatible PC operating systems from attracting enough consumer demand and ISV support to survive. It does not even prevent vendors of those products from making a profit
3) (about Linux) consumers have by and large shown little inclination to abandon Windows, with its reliable developer support, in favor of an operating system whose future in the PC realm is unclear. By itself, Linux's open-source development model shows no signs of liberating that operating system from the cycle of consumer preferences and developer incentives that, when fueled by Windows' enormous reservoir of applications, prevents non-Microsoft operating systems from competing.

And that is just 3 items....seems the "findings of fact" show it is not MS that is to blame, but the other businesses' fault. Correct?

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

Could you point me to where it states MS is guilty of illegal contracts?

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

I read the *ENTIRE SECTION* dealing with OEMs, and found NOTHING "illegal" listed. Maybe you will have to spell it out for me, since you seem to know and understand much more about it than I do (an OEM).

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

Page 28 of the PDF listed on MSNBC my friend.

On page 30 of that document, the COURT decided (for the consumers) that having *2* different browsers on one computer would cause to much support cost for OEMs. I guess that would be the reasons behind removing IE to put another browser on. That's stupid! I have seen plenty systems with RealPlayer, Netscape, Prodigy, AOL, AIM, and have even seen StarOffice 5.1 installed. These are eMachine, Compaq, HP, etc. If OEMs are already doing *that*, what the heck is the problem with the OEMs? LOL!!!
Heck, I am more than free to set up a system how a customer wants- Netscape browser, etc.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

Just have to pick on you about this, Fewt: Right up above, you state "I don't agree that the prices should be fixed".
Here, you state "as punishment MS should be required to charge fixed published fixed rates for the next 5 years".

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

They shouldn't, however MS has been found guilty of using their prices as a weapon which puts them into a special circumstance.

The really funny part is that he is trying to use page 28 of the document to justify his case.

All that section has to do with is that certain restrictions in the OEM agreements were anti-competitive ... NONE of which had anything to do with what he was discussing above (preferred OEM pricing)

The sections that were deemed anti-competitive had nothing at all to do with pricing whatsoever. (If you read that whole section that starts on page 28 you will see that it ONLY dealt with removal of Microsoft icons from the desktop, addition/modification of desktop icons, and the inital boot sequence AFTER Windows had started.)

Intelligent conversation with minimal fisticuffs.
...A nice change! Keep it up, guys!

Instead of trying to introduce a new barrier to other operating systems, why don't they focus on correcting all the security problems found on all their products? Or, all the problems that people are having with Windows? Would they do this if they had competition to the windows monopoly?

"Would they do this if they had competition to the windows monopoly?"

They are doing this because they *are starting to have* competition. ;-)

jlopez: What kind of "barrier" are you refering to in this post?

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

Just like the premium they charged pc makers who used winmodems...did it really make Windows better to use winmodems or just prevented most people from using Linux?....competition from where?

Have to answer for him.. I believe he's referring to barrier to entry. If these cards support a codec that only works properly in Windows, who's going to use anything else? You have alternate O/S with no video support in one hand, and Windows with Direct X in the other. That's not a hard call for the common consumer to make.

jlopez posted "Just like the premium they charged pc makers who used winmodems"

First I have heard of this. You mean Microsoft is to blame for the cheap PCI modems, the high prices of external and ISA modems, and the soon demise of the ISA slot on motherboards?

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

ISA should have died over 20 years ago, hardware manufacturers should have abandoned it for a 32bit bus when the 386DX was released. What good is a 16Bit 8MHz bus anymore? (There was a 32bit ISA, it was called EISA for those that didn't know.)

it's a part of the case against M$...strange tibits when you read them...

And? So what should MS do, build DirectX for a competing platform....

You people really piss me off when you think MS has to do everything for their competition.

"You people really piss me off when you think MS has to do everything for their competition."

Actually, porting DirectX never crossec my mind, I was referring to the hardware companies that are building MS's technology into their cards. If MS doesn't expect it to be supported by more than just their O/S, then they need to stick to building their OS and stay the hell out of my hardware.

'nuff said.

MS isn't the ones building the hardware. Simply put, Microsoft makes a gaming API standard, and these graphics companies are putting their support in it, because that is what will make them money.

Uhh, I guess you didn't read the article before you posted, it's a video codec. If MS manages to put a proprietary video codec into hardware, and the hardware manufacturers don't release an API for everyone to use, then it's potentially all over for all of the alternative OS's. Don't be so blind that you can't read before you post. :-P

It cracks me up that every time there's a news story about MS or Linux...suddenly all the Linux guys come in and cry (especially fewt, I see your anti MS/pro linux posts in every article, even ones that have nothing to do with the subject). So the hardware manufacturers, and MS, are doing something that will make them more money, OH MY GOD PLEASE SAY IT AIN'T SO, after all nobody should really want to make money, they should just create stuff that works with everything and give it away. If linux is so bad that you have to complain every time MS comes out with something new, why don't you stop using Linux and use Windows? You'll probably have less to complain about (although you'll still find somethin...you won't know what to do in your day if you can't recompile your kernel).

Get a life kid, I asked nate a very valid question. If you have a problem with it, turn your computer off and do something else.

So let me get this straight... you think that competitors to MS should benefit from Microsoft's R&D?

This is something that MS provides for their user base, not for other people's user base.

That's like saying "MS added this killer feature, it may deal a crippling blow to MS's competitors, this is just wrong that MS isn't releasing the feature for their competitors."

Don't be so blinded by your anything that MS does is wrong attitude.

MS releasing it is one thing, putting it in hardware that everyone is going to use even is another. I don't know about you, but I prefer to get my money's worth. Would you buy a car that you couldn't put into 4th gear unless you had goodyear tires?

MS is incorporating this into DirectX, and right now, DirectX is the biggest thing in PC gaming, therefore companies like ATi, nVidia, and SiS are all adding support for DirectX into their card.... nothing is different here. The Corona stuff is a part of Dx9, the chipsetmakers are adding support for Dx9, and therefore Corona.

This is nothing different than what happens now.... you get ABSOLUTLEY no benefit from nVidia incorporating support for Dx in there Geforce cards because you use Linux and there is no Linux version of DirectX. This is a big selling point for nVidia (support for DirectX), and also the other 3D companies.

Again, stop being so blinded by thinking that everything MS does is wrong.

I'm not the blind one here. I have no problem with directx, it's a great technology. My beef is that they are putting it into hardware, and I will have to pay a premium for that even though I can not use it. It's plain wrong, I don't really care how you explain it. As far as I'm concerned the argument is over, there is no point in replying it will not sway me feelings on the subject.

The point is, DirectX is ALREADY put into these graphics cards, and yes, you pay a premium for it even though you can't use it. Nothing is changing here with the Corona stuff. Corona is part of Dx9, the graphics card makers are support Dx9 in their cards.

LOL...I have a life, kid...which is why I can't waste my time with linux when windows does what I need, without having to recompile it's kernel a million times a day. What exactly does your analogy have to do with this...you won't buy the video card because you need windows to use a certain function on it? Good...nobody is asking you to buy the card, buy one that doesn't have that chip on it...95% of the people out there are using windows so they'll buy the card, you're not hurting their profits, really. I suppose apple should make the ipod work with windows, too?

Yeah, I recompile my kernel 9 million times a day.. It's sad but true. Tell me kind sir, what will it take for me to become as l337 as you? I just can't take these constant recompiles anymore! Please I WANNA BE LIKE YOU! - ROTFLMFAO! You don't have a life there jerky, you are nothing more than a sorry 'lil wanna be. Quit wasting my ether.

"You don't have a life there jerky, you are nothing more than a sorry 'lil wanna be. Quit wasting my ether."

A sorry lil wanna be what? I'm not the one getting upset here over a stupid OS debate...funny how you start using personal insults as a way of making yourself feel better, that's fine if that's what you need to do to make you happy. I'm not the one getting upset that not everybody in the world enjoys linux as much as me and there won't be a DX9 for linux. the fact that you are tho', proves of your "l337ness"...yes, I do wish I could be more like you...if only the various linux distros turned me on as much as girls do...that would be "l337", right?? :)

Do yourself a favor and just stop calling people kids who disagree with you, we'll just all assume the "Hey kid..." part at the beginning of all your posts.

And the personal attacks do absolutely *NOTHING* to further your point, in fact they do you a disservice. All it tells everyone is that you have to use personal attacks because you don't know how to debate like an adult.

How old are you William? 'nuff said.

Upset? No LOL. IMHO, you are a sorry lil wanna be computer dude that will never amount to anything, and clearly a waste of ether. There's just nothing more to say to you, so feel free to get the last jab in since we all need another laugh. ;-)

lol...yea I'm sure everybody is laughing at me, that gets me really upset, it does...I love how you like to insult people you know nothing about...I may not amount to anything in your eyes (maybe you've been looking at that screen to long buddy?)...I don't know how much money you make...but I can confidently say I probably pull in more then you, and love doing what I do...even if I don't, that's fine with me, I don't really care if you think I don't amount to anything...I'm happy with my life.

lol...wow this debate really drifted off topic....so anyway, windows sucks and linux rules all right? ;)

mrastudent:
"And the personal attacks do absolutely *NOTHING* to further your point, in fact they do you a disservice. All it tells everyone is that you have to use personal attacks because you don't know how to debate like an adult. "

fewt:
"How old are you William?"

lol...you just love proving other people right don't you? ;)

Thank you.

How old are you William?

"but I can confidently say I probably pull in more then you" Highly doubt it.

How old are YOU, Mr. "w00t I'm a l33t google searchx0r"?

27 William, it's your turn. Kid.

No, directx is not already in these cards, the cards drivers however do support directx. MS is trying to put both an audio, and a video codec into hardware, very similar to hardware MPEG. This is all well and fine as long as there is an API that can be used by any O/S that supports these cards.

18.

:Looking around here to see how cares:

Oh wow, just as suspected. Nobody cares, and the fact that you're 27 doesn't help your position in any way.

No, however I am justified in calling you a kid. I have more than 10 years of HANDS ON in the computer industry, not spanking it to the latest nvidia drivers. How many years have you been in the biz?

'nuff said

Ok, so what if that *one* DX9 codec (out of however many are programmed into the card) only works for MSWindows, so what? That same video card works under Linux, right, with ONLY that ONE CODEC not used? What about the programs and things that have ONLY been optimized for the Intel MMX technology, or their newer tech? Or what about "Mac Only" hardware?
(I still wonder why it most always boils down to a "Windows vs Linux" only fight, leaving Apple tech by the side)

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

If I am to pay for both the R&D, and the technology itself, it's not to much to ask to be able to use it.

fewt, I'm sorry .. but you are an idiot. DirectX support is built into the hardware. And yes, corona is just another addition to it.

What cards? Lemme see some specs.

Fewt, you aid "If I am to pay for both the R&D, and the technology itself, it's not to much to ask to be able to use it."

You CAN use it, the way it is made to be used- on a windows-based platform (to get the MS codecs working, that is). If you want to use that (The MS codec) in something other than what it is made for, that is (bluntly) your problem. If you want it to work with Linux and OSX, then write MS and request it. Besides, if it is for DVD playback, and Linux doesn't support DVD, why b**** about the MS codec not supporting something that is not supported in your OS to begin with? I do believe you told me before Linux cannot play DVD "legally", correct?

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

Fewt, MrAStudent, I am older than you both, so THERE! Listen to your "elder", and play nice, or it will be a time out for the 2 of you, and no snack after dinner!

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

If it's the hardware it's the hardware vendors job to ensure their cards are FULLY compatable with supported OS's. (OS/X, Linux, Windows)It's *NOT* my problem, they want me to pony up the cash, provide something that works.

Hmm, I bet you think Microsoft's search technology is fare better then google's ?

Sure thing, Nvidia's GeForce line of cards and ATI's Radeon (R200 specifically) line of cards. Both of which have per-pixel shader's built into them and which are part of the DirectX 8.1 specification. Granted, Nvidia developed this techonology, and I believe licensed it to MS to be added to DirectX, but nevertheless, if the card does not have this functionality built-in it CANNOT be fully DirectX 8.1 compliant and thus proving my point that hardware is created to specifically support DirectX (and vice versa). Usually the manufacturers also add their own extensions to OpenGL to support these new features, and so us non-Windows users don't have much to complain about.

Now, ideally you would want MS to provide the corona codec to all, but this isn't an ideal world, and as someone stated above, you cannot bash MS for this type of decision. Almost all companies do this type of thing, its just a bandwagon type of thing to bash MS. For example, Nvidia would have probably kept pixel shaders to themselves if they thought it would make them more money, but it was in their best interest to give it to MS to put in DirectX. DirectX is the dominant 3D graphics API and making it harder for developers to develop for their cards by not having their functionality easily accessible would be shooting themselves in the foot.

"Sure thing, Nvidia's GeForce line of cards and ATI's Radeon (R200 specifically) line of cards. Both of which have per-pixel shader's built into them and which are part of the DirectX 8.1 specification."

So, what you are really saying is that they have a per pixel shader built in, that's hardly DX 8.1.. You have not proven your point at all.

Fewt replied: "If it's the hardware it's the hardware vendors job to ensure their cards are FULLY compatable with supported OS's"

RIGHT. And if that hardware vendor does NOT want to support anything but ONE OS (Like Apple, eh?) then that is what they do. If the graphic card makers accept an offer to put optimized Linux stuff in the chips, that won't run under Windows OS, then I expect you to make the same fuss, ok? LOL

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

"If the graphic card makers accept an offer to put optimized Linux stuff in the chips, that won't run under Windows OS, then I expect you to make the same fuss, ok? LOL"

You have my word on it. ;-)

Simply put...if you don't like what the chip makers are doing, don't buy their product.

>You CAN use it, the way it is made to be used- on a windows-based platform (to get the MS codecs
>working, that is). If you want to use that (The MS codec) in something other than what it is made for,
>that is (bluntly) your problem. If you want it to work with Linux and OSX, then write MS and request
>it.

It's not MS's problem, unless NVidia and ATI signed contracts to disallow non MS OS's to use them (which would be ruled as anti-competitive if it went to court) It's the card manufacturers.

>Besides, if it is for DVD playback, and Linux doesn't support DVD, why b**** about the MS codec not

It's an ongoing battle to ensure that I get what I pay for just like you do.

>supporting something that is not supported in your OS to begin with? I do believe you told me before
>Linux cannot play DVD "legally", correct?

Linux can legally play DVD only using a legal DVD player (Just like Windows, however Linux DVD players have only recently become available.) However, these players unlike their windows counterparts are not included with the players, and are an at cost product. (Which is OK) It was, and is illegal (Thanks in part to the DMCA) to decode encrypted DVD using DVDCCS on any O/S. The point I had made to you at that time was that there were no industry supported players on the market, making DVD on Linux "illegal".

Tell me then, what is there on the market besides NVidia and ATI these days?

Fewt:
Thanks for the reply. So, if you can only get Linux to play DVD by a software purchase,maybe that software maker will have a way to have the software take advantage of the Corona Codec. That would make you happy.
As for the audio, that would mean a programmer making Linux drivers for the card programming that in. Again, it goes back to the card maker/programmer, not MS.
There are still many hardware makers that do not put out Linux drivers, but only put drivers out for Windows based, correct? Is that Microsoft's fault, or the hardware makers' fault?

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

Yes, I would be content with that solution, though I would be happier if it came from the hardware cost, and not an extra. I have no problem purchasing things that I use, my sound drivers or my plugins for example.

Quit spanking it, and answer the damn question MrIWannaBeAL337Fool. How long you been in the 'biz?

They're may not be other chip makers, but they make other products. The Geforce line does not have these Microsoft codecs in them. (Actually, the Geforce 3 has Directx 8 instruction set built in, but works great under Linux). Obviously, if Linux was such a lucrative market, they would make chips just for that platform. (I use both OSs so this is a non biased comment) This is just my $0.02

SiS, Kyro, Matrox... just to name the biggies.

Microsoft owns some of Apple (stock-wise), why wouldn't they develop for them? I've read that people believe that without Microsoft's help, Apple would have gone under! That's why you now see Internet Explorer for MacOS and Office XP for MacOS. But Mac doesn't need DirectX since OpenGL is just fine.

But the question that I would bring forth is this. If WINE is able to allow linux users to run DirectX windows games, what would stop it from using programs that access the Corona chip on the video card through DirectX and using it in Linux. Games like Diablo II work on Linux under wine and they require DirectX (7.0 for D2).

You cannot say that nVidia isn't trying to make their cards more compatible. Heck, you should be praising them for actually making linux drivers! Some companies don't even make Windows 2k/XP drivers for their products much less drivers for all Windows OSes and Linux. There are also GeForces available on the Macs.

But the problem I see is an upcoming GeForce V. We don't need a new GeForce released with every new chip (and a large price tag to go with it!) Video card manufacturers seem to think that everyone is filled with money and can buy all the latest video cards to replace the last model. I have a ASUS GeForce II MX and I don't mind it. Sure, I wouldn't mind a brand new GeForce IV 4800 but most gamers, I bet, would concur.

Sorry fewt, but arrogance will not get your point across any better. Sorry for the "personal attack" but it was a necessity in such a situation.

Now, I don't believe you being older gives you an advantage. He most likely lived through an era where he got a computer much sooner than you. Which henceforth gave him more hands on training with one.

You are't giving any facts but are making quite a lot of assumptions based on age which means nothing in this society. Please, don't try and justify things so hastily anymore. Just because I am 17, I hope it doesn't mean that you will try and ostracize me from any sort of discussion because I am wanting to learn more about a topic or believe I know something about a topic.

Not trying to contradict what you say, but I don't believe that external modems are outrageous in price or even an internal hardware modem from USR. They are more expensive but consumers just don't know of any of the benefits. I have a Creative Modem Blaster DE5625. It's a nice modem that does a lot better job than the old Rockwell Winmodem that was in my other computer.

Look how cheap PCs are though, manufacturers have to skimp somewhere and now they believe everyone has broadband which makes the modem obsolete for most functions. So then why would a user need a $70 USR modem? I believe that is the focus of the computer manufacturers today.

Well some reasons to not port it are the fact that MS's Apple team is very small, and doesn't do things like making API's. Another reason is to simply keep all the games on the Windows platform.

"and doesn't do things like making API's"

Uhh isn't ActiveX an API? My understanding is that it had been ported to Mac. :-P

Uhh I had a commodore at 6, and was doing circuit level repairs by 13. He has no where near the hands on I do. ;-) I'm making assumptions based on reading his posts over the last year, that's all it takes. LOL

You sound a little immature to be 27, so I highly doubt you are. But if you want to start comparing salaries, I'm up to the challenge. I'd also compare resumes with you to see who has more experience. Settle down...kid.

I was not aware that they had ActiveX on the Mac... then again, I don't really think of ActiveX as an API.

" You sound a little immature to be 27, so I highly doubt you are. But if you want to start comparing salaries, I'm up to the challenge. I'd also compare resumes with you to see who has more experience. Settle down...kid."

Oh, I'm not 27 because I sound a little immature. No, not immature, just not a sheep. ;-) As for comparing resume's and salaries, interns make ~$10.00 an hour right? You'd have to multiply that a few times to come close.

"Uhh I had a commodore at 6, and was doing circuit level repairs by 13."

Uhh...I was born with a circuit in my hand and invented the COMPUTER at the age of 4!!! So THERE you un-experienced, computere wanna be!!

lol...you see how ridiculous you sound...I don't care if your mom made love with a processor and had you as a result, you will never know what any of us really do and we will never know anything about you (unless I find out you're my little brother or something).

" Uhh...I was born with a circuit in my hand and invented the COMPUTER at the age of 4!!! So THERE you un-experienced, computere wanna be!!"

lol!

"lol...you see how ridiculous you sound...I don't care if your mom made love with a processor and had you as a result, you will never know what any of us really do and we will never know anything about you (unless I find out you're my little brother or something)."

No, I was stating the facts not pulling something out of my ass. ;-) I really don't care who any of you are, or what you do, most of you are dumb asses with very little computer knowledge. I spend half my time here scratching my head wondering how you people managed to find this place. Go back to AOL where most of you NBM wanna-be's belong before they begin to miss you. :-P haha (How many of you can tell me the difference between the 4040 and the 6581 or even what they are?) :-P

lol...well, why do you keep coming back and reading these forums then fewt? And if you really don't care, why did you ask mrastudent how old he was? I don't know fewt, it might be a multi-personality disorder...or maybe you really have been looking at the screen for too long?

So what if alot of people on here don't know as much about computers as us...doesn't mean they're not as good as you. My friend is a construction worker and he's a better person then you'll ever hope to be, and much happier too. He's the one tried to use his CD tray as a cup holder. ;)

"he's a better person then you'll ever hope to be, and much happier too."

When have I ever claimed to want to be a good person? I'm perfectly happy just the way I am. :-P

As for reading these forums, I think it's quite clear that it's pure entertainment factor. :-( lol

So, I'm right in my thought that all of your posts are simply p**** envy? lol! Typical, just plain typical (especially for you). See ya next time you muster up some backbone there kiddo. ;-)

Well, since I'm not an intern, it's more like 6 figures. Can you come close?

Sure can.

There is absolutely no way you are worth 6 figures unless you haven't updated that resume in 5 years. ;-)

Hi everyone! I'm new here, my name is mrastupid. I think anything microsoft makes is the best product in the market! I wish microsoft would start making Cars. and you can't forgot, no hardware is prefect, my 100G HD, only 1g of it works, oh well, this is normal sence no hardware is prefect, I expect all computer hardware to fail within the frist couple hours of use, I just remember no hardware is prefect, so i just throw it out the window and look for some more! oh and linux sucks! What kind of a OS is one you don't have to reboot every time you move the mouse ? Thats silly not having to reboot every 5 minutes to apply the lateast buffer under run problems.

Well that all depends which one your looking at...

You know which one I'm looking at. ;-) Summer 2001 internship huh, you need lots more experience before you come close to 6 figures. ;-)

I had a commodore back in the day, so the damn thing broke on me after 2 days, oh well, i just thought no hardware is prefect, so i throw it out the windows and went out and bought me a brand new one!

Windows is great!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'd throw my computer out the window if I didn't have to apply buffer under run errors every 2 minutes, you just can't have a good day unless you apply 10 security updates for the same thing.

I invented the computer people! I made my frist IBM main frame out of a old washer/dry box i had around the house, i painted it blue, and called it a day. It was, and still is the fastest computer on the block, I'm going to make a updated verios thats more powerful, i'm going to give it 1meg of ram, sence thats more then enough for anyone, after all no one needs more then 640k, was all anyone could ever use.

>Would you buy a car that you couldn't put into 4th gear unless you had goodyear tires?

Actually, people do. My 96 Z28 Camaro when it came from the factory had Goodyear tires on it. For the people who don't want to spend the extra 700$, you get standard Dunlop tires. The thing is, the Goodyear tires are Z rated, so if you deside to not get them, the car comes with a 115 mph governor. 4th gear starts around 115-120 mph, so, yes, people do buy cars that can't get into 4th gear. (At least not with the pedal to the floor :)

Since none of you managed an answer, the Intel 4040 is a 4 bit microprocessor, which was replaced by the Intel 8080, which became the 8086, then the 80186 80286 386 486 586 686.. The 6581 was the sound chip used in most production run C64's. You geeks should know this stuff.. :-P

Nate, how about some geek trivia php.. ;-)

Yes, but I'm sure that that is for your physical protection. LOL

lololol

ROFL!!!!!

Let everyone please not that if *any* comment by fewt has ever been bad for his reputation, this is it.

Wasn't me kid, feel free to ask Nate for proof.

Sorry for assuming it was you, but it appears to be someone who agrees with you, and its hard to find people like that around here.

And is nate the admin?

That's quite an assumption, however you are very wrong. There are quite a few people here that agree with most of what I have to say. Yes, Nate Mook is one of the admins. Don't assume that no one agrees with me simply due to the fact that a small number of you enjoy arguing with me. ;-)

mrastupid posted "I invented the computer people"

Hey, are you Al Gore?? Thanks for "inventing" the internet! LOL!!

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

I just wanted to mention that I honestly cannot believe how STUPID you are.

That's all I have to say.

No, I'd like to hear how and why you believe I'm stupid. This could be fun.

Six times DVD Resolution? (720X480) that's 4320x2880. I don't know of any desktop monitors that support this resolution (yet)
Anyway, it takes much more to replace DVD standard as we know it today. It will probably become yet another 'PC-ONLY-Codec' that is not really supported by movies, tv shows etc.

someone failed basic math apparently

(AxB)*6 = (3*A)(2*B)

NOT = (6*A)(6*B)

thats equal to (AxB)*36.

Jeez. learn to do some math

Actually, AxB in this statement isn't a multiplication, it is a size. Therefore two separate calculations of A*6 and B*6 is correct.

Like when you goto a hardware store, and ask for a piece of 2x4, it is a piece of wood, 2 inches by 4 inches.

DVD res depends of standard. It is 720x576 for PAL. in the case of PAL that gives 414,720 pixels. 6 times that is 2,488,320. Preserving the aspect ration 1.25:1 it translates in 1764x1411. This is quite far from the 4320x2880 _docco_ calculated, even considering for the higher PAL res. I think my monitor could cope with that res but with a modest refreash rate.
Cheers

In fact if I want a sheet of paper 6 times bigger than the original one I can stick together 6 sheets of paper of the original size. That does not mean the height and the width of the bigger one are 6 times of the original..
Or put it another way: if I say that my house is 6 times larger than yours it means that mine is 6000sqf while yours is 1000sqf. This does not mean is 6 times longer AND 6 times wider. ;-)
Cheers

Finally! A reason to use Jr. High math!

Nate, what does this mean for OS's that don't use DirectX like Linux and OS/10? Will ATI and NVidia provide their own API so these technologies can be used by "everyone else"?

Well, it could mean they are adding those "Corona" APIs with all the "general" types- optimized for Corona, but able to work with others without problems?
Here is info from Microsoft: http://www.microsoft.com...02/04-23VideoCardPR.asp

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

That press release does not mention how the "on die" technology will be usable by operating systems other than Windows. That's my question. ;-)

good point, but that would be partially up to the OS makers themselves. can you play wmv files on OSX or Linux?

Because the chipsets will make heavy use of DirectX Acceleration via drivers, I fear this is mainly going to benefit Windows. Even if the decoding is in the hardware, it has to work with drives which right now are designed for Windows. In fact, because Windows XP is the only OS with DXVA built-in, I bet Microsoft will use this as a way to get people to upgrade.

I can't speak for OSX, but I can play them on Linux.

I'm sure someone will come along and support it, but it irks me to think that nothing is going to change with hardware vendors, and the O/S with 90% of the market is going to continue to be the only one that benefits. :-(

It all comes down to money. Businesses can make money off this and they don't care if its bad for the small 10% that doesn't use Windows

This is true, however until consumers slap hardware vendors around they will continue to fuel the monopoly. It's a catch 22.

that's the hard part. getting consumers to see the light. I work where people think windows me is win2k, never heard of other operating systems. they're so dependent on windows, that well its pathetic. the other day i was at microcenter in the linux/unix section, and one guy told a consumer not to purchase linux. he said that he used redhat 7.2 and it took him 3 hours to setup the network card. When he rebooted the machine, the network card was "gone". I thought to myself, what a noobie, but as you see, these types of people are gonna feed microsoft.

(natively)

"that's the hard part. getting consumers to see the light"

This is especially true with the arrogant fools with absolutely no experience badmouthing it every chance they get, increasing the confusion factor 10 fold.

If these API's are Microsoft API's only, you can't really port them to a different OS. MS would have to do that. Anyone else that trys to, MS will check their code and see if it infringes on any of their patents! :o

I actually agree with Fewt on the "arrogant fools with absolutely no experience badmouthing it every chance they get", but I attribute that to anyone that does it with ANY OS. Sure, Linux distros have a steep learning curve. And if you only do Linux, going to XP will be hard. Just don't mouth off about how hard it is or "lame", etc, until you try using it for a length of time.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

Actually, WineX 2.0 does a good job of DX7... I can play max payne and UT and Counterstrike under linux. Porting APIs can (and is) be done.

Fewt, from what I have read, it looks like the codecs are ADDED, meaning they are included with all the other code in the chips. It will only benefit MS Windows users, but the the Corona stuff will not activiate under non-directX systems. Just like if you have an AMD cpu, there are things in some hardware that will not activate, because they are made for Intel CPUs.
I may not be correct on that, but that is what I understand about it.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

How is performance, the last time I attempted to run a DX app it ran slow compared to running the app natively.

>Fewt, from what I have read, it looks like the codecs are ADDED, meaning they are
>included with all the other code in the chips. It will only benefit MS Windows users,
>but the the Corona stuff will not activiate under non-directX systems. Just like if
>you have an AMD cpu, there are things in some hardware that will not activate,
>because they are made for Intel CPUs.
>I may not be correct on that, but that is what I understand about it.

That's exactly what I'm saying. Will I get a discount if I'm not able to use that component? cough *hell no* cough

Gee, should we get discounts for software we buy that has installs for various windows and mac, if we only use one version of windows, and not the other? LOL

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

No. You are taking my comments out of context and expecting the exact opposite.

Ok, let's see if this works: No, I don't see *anyone* getting a "discount" just because they don't use the Windows Platform with these cards. Take it up with nVidia and ATI. Maybe they will make a "linux optimized" video card if enough linux users ask.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

I don't think I'd be ok with that because it would fragment the video market (IMHO).

wowowow, hold everything, fewt will not be ok with that...tell NVIDIA and ATI to stop making video cards optimized for windows IMMEDIATLEY and start developing universal cards that work the same on everything...we can't risk making fewt unhappy. Companies should stop trying to figure out a way of maximizing profits and minizming and start trying to figure out how to make a few linux users happy (fewt in particular). what could nvidia and ati possibly be thinking?!

Few linux users? I thought there were tens of millions of us! Gee, what was I thinking! *DOH*

Performance is almost on par (as I can visually see, keep in mind, I am not watching a fps counter) with winbloze. The games are extremly playable, and while playing, you can't tell that it's not running under winbloze...

Cool, are you using WineX or are you compiling winehq source?

You were apparently thinking that you should radically inflate the numbers.

Unless of course you can supply a *reputable* source for a claim of 10's of millions of Linux users.
(not going to happen)

Why would they?

ATI has already taken the position that they do not write, provide or support Linux drivers for any of their products.
(They do not prevent third party drivers.....but they do NOT support them)

Nvidia has limited support for reference Linux drivers. Most of the companies that manufacture cards using Nvidia chips also do not write, provide, or support Linux drivers.

So whether or not Linux can take advantage of native support for Corona is kind of a moot point when the companies in question have already made the choice to not support Linux.

"Linux optimized" video cards?

Not likely... since we are talking about companies that have already made the choice to NOT support Linux.

Here you go, the estimated number of desktop users in *1997* was 17 Million, you want to know what it is today, look for yourself. Me, I know that it's in the 10's of millions. http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jhtml?containerId=24844 Go home guy, your worthless.

So, were you born this dumb?

http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?PAGE=linux

Gee, welcome to reality. This is exactly what I'm complaining about. Thanks for confirming.

And which are you complaining about, the fact that they are excercising their right as a company to not pour time, money, and resources into a project (linux drivers) that they do not consider to be financially viable? Or the fact that Linux has not evolved to the point where there is enough demand for high-end video card to give those same manufacturers incentive?

As I said, Nvidia has "limited reference driver support" for SOME of their chipsets.

Nvidia does not manufacture the majority of video cards that use the Nvidia architecture. (they seem to video card manufacturers)

Most of those manufacturers have chosen to not support linux.

As I said....provide one single *reputable* source.

(something you still have been unable to do)

Source for those 1997 numbers? (doesn't seem you have one)

Source for today's numbers? (all you could come up with was a paid market analysis report from a company that gets paid to tell companies whatever they want to hear)

How about ANY independant, reputable source?
(still not going to happen)

There is plenty of demand, NVidia makes Linux drivers. If ATI had half a brain they would too. There are ten's of millions of Linux users (see for yourself by reading the report I've linked to below). That's hundreds of millions of potential sales that they may miss because NVidia has decided that they want Linux sales too. (It would cost the company less than $1,000 to create a video driver, and not much more to train their people to support it.)

Again, it's a poor choice and one that changes when people such as myself speak up about it. Lemme give you proof.. http://newsforge.com/new.../02/1514240.shtml?tid=7

WTF? Since when is IDC not a reputable source? These are 2001 numbers there paco wake up and count the flippin penguins.

Let's see, you're claiming you have a reputable source for an estimate of 17 million linux destop users in 1997.

The estimate considered most accurate in the industry was done by RedHat in 1998 and had what they considered an "optimistic" total of 7.5 million total linux users (not just RedHat) in the world (desktop and server). www.redhat.com and www.linuxjournal.com

Odd that a study admitted to be quite optimistic listed well under half of the numbers that you claim were accurate a whole year earlier. (Probably less than a third since they were estimating desktop and server and you were claiming just desktop)

Let's see, IDC's June 2000 report estimates a growth rate of less than 2 million new linux users for the year. (Desktop and server again)

Seems that the numbers are far, far less than the 10's of millions you like to claim.

IDC estimates over 40Million Linux users by 2005, I don't know where you are getting your data, but it's wrong. (As you always are.) I provided a link to real data, you chose not to follow it. Your problem, shut up and go away.

Wow, you people are really really stupid, not supported linux ? no s*** ? then why has Dreamworks converted all there SGI boxes for to linux ? Why have most of the Large corpartion's started supporting linux more then windows ? Linux is more streamed lined then windows, think about it, would a computer procession Graphics being faster then one that is just processing a bunch of 1 and 0's, and then outputing it right to text ? Don't forgot windows is primary wrote on C++ (I think) C++ is the worst programing lang, i toke a class in college but droped it, simply because it wasn't something i wanted to learn, I don't like the idea of seeing a program that is half-a-meg, and all it does is add's two numbers together, this was Visual Basic C++ btw.

You people are idiots, I but every single one of you is someone that thinks they know everything about computers, they went out and bought them self's a Nice new E-machine for 500 bucks, toke it out the box, and thought they new everything because they got it to turn on, then they got out and take jobs from Real people that actually know what they are talking about. I'd dealed with the hole Windows Network OS's, they plain suck, the network at my high-school was down more then it was up, At college its Novell based, I HAVE yet to see the server go down. Now all of you are going to say "novell sucks, microsoft rocks", have you even used netware products ? Can your microsoft products keep a uptime or over a year ? You have to be a real idiot to crash a novell box, the only time i have seen novell crash is when a crappy writen NLM was ran, I'm getting sick of people here, Face the facts, look around, Microsoft products suck, notice how more then 50% of all Web-sites are hosted on Apache servers ? heck this site is on a BSD/Apache box.

fubar, contrary to what you claim (every single one of you is someone that thinks they know everything about computers, they went out and bought them self's a Nice new E-machine for 500 bucks, toke it out the box, and thought they new everything because they got it to turn on, then they got out and take jobs from Real people that actually know what they are talking about) I will NEVER claim to "know everything". I will not own an eMachine since I build my own systems. I firmly beleive that anyone that claims to be an "expert", or "knows everything", is someone to run away from.

Otherwise, there are to many paper-techs out there causing trouble for those who actually learned on the systems they are working on. School learning is ok, I guess, but I much prefer hands-on learning myself :)

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

Wow fewt, you apperantly know more than all of these major corporations.

Let's see, which is more likely.....that all of the exectives (who have the real information) are all mistaken....or that fewt with his "estimates" as to cost, demand, etc. is mistaken?

LOL, you just keep thinking that you know more than every executive in the world fewt. It's amusing. :P

IDC has always provided "cooked" numbers that suit their target audience.

ATI is almost doing the right thing by supporting third party developers with tools and technical information. They are doing 8/10ths of the work where NVidia is doing the whole job. This is better than most other card manufacturers have done. Where are those card manufacturers today?

You keep being an idiot Wendor, you really had me going there. For a minute there I thought you had a brain.

Prove it.

You provided a link to real data?

Not one that supported your claim.

You claimed 10's of millions of Linux desktop users today.

You did not provide a link to a source that confirms that at all.

You provided a link to a source that says that based on a fairly long list of assumptions, they think that maybe the linux market will grow in a particular manner in the future.

You did not, however, provide any source for an accurate count of current linux desktop users.

And how does this article relate to the lack of demand or financial incentive for the video card manufacturers to support linux?

The answer is: Not at all.

But you go right ahead trying to pretend that you know more than all of the executives at the companies that manufacture video cards. I'm sure someday someone will be gullible enough to believe you.

What it proves is that there is enough financial incentive to cause a company to s*** gears based upon the comments of the OSS crowd. I'm not pretending anything there guy, but you keep posting that load. I'll LMAO as you get left behind. What happened to that first business of yours again?

'nuff said :-P

I provided a link to the best source of data possible, if you had any business sense at all you would understand that the analysts are what s*** markets. I provided a solid link, and you are not man enough to admit defeat. Your problem.

Seems to me that the video card companies that have survived are the ones who have chosen to NOT write/support drivers for Linux.

So, by your own logic (regarding survial of companies) it woudl seem straightforward that supporting Linux is death for graphics card companies and not supporting Linux allows them to succeed.

My first business? Sold for a profit if your recall.

I never said that there wasn't enough financial incentive for ANY company to make ANY change regarding OSS.

I said specifically that there is not enough financial incentive for graphics card manufacturers to provide linux drivers/support.

You provided a solid link?

Well, since the link you provided was to a report that no one can read unless they pay money for it, it could say anything (including that there are only 10 linux users in the world and that you work for Microsoft)

Either provide a link to PUBLIC information that supports your claim (remember, it's that there are 10's of millions of linux DESTOP users as of right now) or admit that you made it up.

I also notice that you have still failed to provide a source/supporting information for your claim of 17 million linux destop users in 1997. (just admit that you made that one up too)

I understand analysts and projections.

You, however, were supposed to be providing sources/support for your claim of a *current* count, not a 3 to 5 year projection.

OK.

How about we use your favorite source, the Microsoft trial under Judge Jackson.

http://seattletimes.nwso...ml98/micr_19990604.html

Even Judge Jackson agreed that IDC's numbers were tailored to suit the customer who paid for the study.

Lets see the proof guy. NeoMagic refused to write Linux drivers, where are they today? You are not supporting my logic, you are making a pathetic attempt to twist what I have said to suit your cause whatever that may be. You really need to take a break and get a clue.

Ok, by your logic then Linux people don't buy video cards.

That's one man's opinion, gartner is saying the same thing. If no one is using it, then what are Ford europe, Burlington Coat Factory, Home Depot, Walmart, Henson Productions, Dreamworks interactive, IBM, and all of these other major corporations using? (Say Windows please, I need another laugh) Funny I mentioned Henson and Dreamworks, think they'll need video cards?

I haven't made anything up, and I'm not going any further with this discussion. You come here with nothing to contribute, and make yourself look like an a** every chance you get simply because I am here and you don't like me. Reading your posts I firmly believe you are nothing more than a shill with one agenda, running me off. Well, I hate to break the news to you jerky you are nothing, and never will be. Conversation's over. (All forks.)

dang Fewt! Looks like Wendor got to ya a bit. I don't believe he is here "just to run you off because he hates you", though. Looks like Wendor just wants solid facts/evidence for some things said. Can't blame him; you can't take much anything someone posting anonymously here as "pure fact", can you?

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

I provided everything necessary to put him in his place, he chose to ignore it so screw'em. ;-)

Pretty simple and straightforward.

The majority of the graphics card manufacturers that have survived and are still in business (including the largest one) do not write, provide, or support Linux drivers.

No.

By my logic, Linux people do not buy enough video cards for the manufacturers to consider it worthwhile to provide/support Linux drivers for them.

It's the opinion of one man who's opinions you have chosen to quote as nearly gospel truth.

There's plenty of other evidence if you bother to look.

Heck, even when Microsoft has quoted numbers from an IDC study you have been one of the first ones to dispute them ont he grounds that "Microsoft just payed them to say that"

I seriously pity any business that takes what IDC says as definitive truth.

Why do all of these companies still use IDC? Because they are *A* source of information. Do they rely only on that source? No. Do that take what IDC says as absolute truth? No.

Really?

You claimed a reliable estimate of Linux desktop users in 1997 at 17 million.

You have not yet provided ANY source for that claim.

You have provided a souce that you claim includes an estimate of Linux users in 2005......but even that is only your claim since the source is not a public document. (It could say anything at all)

Here, let me try your same logic:
This study: http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jhtml?containerId=25647 says that Linux is dead as a doornail and will disappear from the desktop.

Now which option are you going to take?
1. Trust me that it really says that.
2. Pay $1500 to find out.
3. Call me a liar and demand a *public* source that supports my claim.

Face it fewt, your numbers are pure hype and smoke on your part. You have no support or evidence for them at all.

An interesting observation form someone who has publicly posted:

"I troll here for fun"

"Let them ban me, they've done it before and it hasn't stopped me"

"I do this just for fun to piss people like you off"

Seems to me that it's pretty clear who has something to contribute and who doesn't.

(Unless of course you are counting your made up numbers, misinformation, and personal attacks as "contributions")

Yup. fewt is very quick to demand sources and documentation from anyone who posts facts that he doesn't like. I just want to hold him to the same standard.

But it's pretty easy to tell which "facts" are just things fewt made up himself. The conversations all go the same way:

"There were 17 million linux destop users in 1997"
"What's your source for that"
"It says it right here...."
"No, it doesn't say that. What's your source?"
"Uh, you're a fool and I'm not going to respond to you anymore"

Makes it quick to spot his BS since he really is good about providing supporting evidence for the stuff he didn't make up.

Well, I guess they are comfortable making less than they are capable of. I suppose then it is their problem right? The biggest one develops Linux drivers though fool.

Nope, not at all. Since there are so many people creating them themselves, why should the manufacturers waste the effort right?

Tell me wendor, what have you ever posted that was helpful to anyone?

'nuff said

My bad 18 million in 1998. I've figured it out, it's not that you are arrogent.. You are ignorant to the fact that the market is much larger than just what you see in your little town, or even in the USA. Lets say it together. "World Markets" once you understand the meaning maybe you will open your eyes a bit.

I provided you numbers, you provided smoke and mirrors so you could circle around paying for the info that would prove you wrong. There's no way to accurately count real linux users and unless you are a complete fool you know it. I'd say 9/10ths of linux users out there today don't buy boxed copies. If that's too hard for you to swallow, then Screw you. There's just nothing more to say about it. You can be as blind to the truth as you want, just do me a favor, and keep your failure as a business man to your self.

(You want further proof, I suggest that you open your web browser, put http://www.google.com in your address bar, and click go.)

As I said before, the conversation is done.

Really? And who would that be?

ATI does not develop Linux drivers.

Nvidia is not a graphics card manufacturer. They are a graphics chipset manufacturer....and they only develop and provide *reference* drivers for Linux. The majority of the cards manufactured using Nvidia chips do not have Linux drivers developed/provided by their manufacturers. (though the reference drivers will often work)

And let us all take notice that fewt STILL can not provide any source whatsoever for this number.

ROFL

fewt, you make me laugh. You can repeat the claim all you want....I'll still call it BS until you can provide one single reputable source for it. Until then it'll just keep getting filed under "fewt's delusions"

Sorry, but even your "estimate" of 17 million linux users in complete hogwash.

You have no source for it, you have nothing to back that claim.

Face it, you made the number up and you got caught doing it.

(I spoke to a friend at Gartner who has access to the IDC study you linked to....it has nothing whatsoever in it about 17 or 18 million linux desktop users in 1997. Maybe that'll put a stop to your BS)

That's funny, if you weren't such a dumb a** you would have seen that I corrected myself.

You have no friends at gartner. You are simply lying in a pathetic attempt to cover your incompetence.

" *How many Linux users are there? Because many distributions of Linux can be freely downloaded and copied, a precise number is hard to come by. The Linux Counter estimates 18 million users as of April 2002. Linus Torvalds himself suggested 10 million in a 1999 PC World interview. A Red Hat press release counts more than 10 million users worldwide, and a GNU Project press release counts over 20 million! " - http://www.linuxbox.nu/PEOPLE/people.html

If you weren't such a fool you would have found it on your own. Now be a good drone and go to google and find dozens more just like it. Scratch that, turn your computer off and go find something you are actually qualified for. :-P