Intel--Nvidia merger or acqusition. unlikely, but possible ?

[J. Clarke]

news:44c70f4b$0$484$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-03.brisbane.pipenetworks.com.au...

We'll see what happens with Vista and .NET. The levels of
ignorance about their roots and purpose are astonishing, but
I think (or at least I hope) once the computing world begins
to understand MS's stated goal -- to chain us to credit cards
and checkbooks just to use a computer

I should like to see a link to that statement.

 

[J. Clarke]

Ad hominem? Even you should be able to understand
plain English:

On Thursday, June 22, 2000, executives from Microsoft
Corporation finally unveiled the company's plans for the
future, which revolve around a set of technologies called
Microsoft .NET ("Microsoft Dot Net"). And while news
of this magnitude tends to make even the mainstream press,
one thing was probably lost on most people that heard
about the new strategy. Microsoft .NET represents a
complete and utter change in the way that Microsoft does
business, and it will gradually transform the company from
one that supplies shrink-wrapped software to one that
supplies subscription-based services to its customers
over the Internet."
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/dotnet_backgrounder.asp

While .NET allows this, it does not require this. Microsoft tried
subscription-based services and decided that that was not an optimal
strategy.

 

[J. Clarke]

Then you don't understand the first thing about Vista.

What specifically doesn't he understand?

It's already happening, although in the background and without
the knowledge of most casual computer users. Have you
installed Adobe Photoshop CS/CS2?

What, exactly, does this have to do with Microsoft or .NET?

Or any Symantec
products? Or Intuit? Did you know the Macrovision SafeCast
services installed by this software can enforce any of four
licensing methods that can be changed at the will of the
publisher -- one of which is "forced subscription"?

Which again has exactly what to do with .NET and Microsoft? Hint--all these
companies were using bizarre copy protection schemes and licensing models
long before .NET.

Do you
know why Vista requires .NET for its hardware drivers?

Perhaps you can tell us?

I could go on, but hopefully you get the idea.

The idea I get is that you read something in 2000 that scared you and then
quit paying attention to subsequent events.

Since 2000
MS has not wavered on their stated purposes and goals of
.NET.

Find us an "unwavering" statement subsequent to 2000.

It was just a matter of buttering up the computing
masses enough so they won't care once these hammers
start coming down. But there's absolutely no reason to
believe me, all you have to do is wait and watch.

We've been waiting and watching for 6 years now and the only hammers that
have come down came down on Microsoft after the subscribers in their pilot
program found out that their subscriptions had expired.

 

[Lee Waun]

You actually own an ATI card? I doubt someone who doesn't like their
drivers would be stupid enough to buy an ATI card. Or are you? If you
don't own one then you don't know WTF you are talking about. As an owner
of an ATI X800XL and a Nvidia 7900GT I feel qualified in saying that ATI's
drivers are just as good, if not beter, than Nvidia's.

I have an ATI x800 and I haven't had a bad driver from ATI in years.
Actually I am using a driver from Oct 05 and it works great. I have stopped
updateing drivers as I don't see how they can do any better than the one I
am using.

 

[Luis Duarte - Powerbase:Lisbon]

VERY unlikely that Intel will seek to acquire NVidia.

First, Intel has their own video chip group, which does the video in the
chipsets (the Intel GMA's .... Graphics Media Accelerators). Yes,
that's been low end, but they could do high-end if Intel wanted to.
Intel simply hasn't wanted to.

Second, a major reason for AMD's acquisition of ATI isn't graphics at
all, it's that ATI is now doing chipsets, and AMD wanted to acquire a
more robust chipset capability to better compete with Intel, which makes
superb chipsets (AMD used to do chipsets, 4-6 years ago, but stopped;
now they want to get back into that, from all appearances).

Third, Intel is likely to be barred from any significant acquisition
because of their size and anti-trust / monopoly considerations. AMD, as
the small underdog, had no such anti-trust or monopoly concerns.

I absolutely agree with this analisys.
I guess also NVidia won't develop more great chipsets for motherboards
supporting AMD cpus since AMD now has absolute control (and preference)
over its (new) own production through ATI.

 

[Rick Cortese]

Yea, they were bad at one time but not anymore. No gamma adjustment?
Must have been a long time since you used their drivers because there is
gamma adjustment. I've installed .Net and it never caused me any issues.
Install ATI raw driversrs and Ray Adam's ATI Tray Tools and you don't
need .Net and also get a lot more functionality than you will from CCC.

For me too as of ~1999, which I admit is a long time in computer years,
I had huge problems which were never resolved. Gamma was the main
problem for me at the time but I had some other issues with 3d games
that forced me to buy a new video card after lack of a response from
ATI. Thing is ~7 years isn't that long for being P.O.ed at a manufacturer.

Great hardware but problems with drivers/running in anything other then
common modes. It was like they only tested 800x600 in 256 color mode and
left everthing else from EGA to other VGA modes to users to figure out.
Serious lack of Q.C. and testing IMO.

 

[krw]

I have an ATI x800 and I haven't had a bad driver from ATI in years.
Actually I am using a driver from Oct 05 and it works great. I have stopped
updateing drivers as I don't see how they can do any better than the one I
am using.

Define "bad". The ATI drivers shipped for years with ThinkPads
don't allow setting different resolutions on internal and external
displays. I had to go to http://www.omegadrivers.com/ to get
drivers that allowed one to chose different resolution and refresh
rates.

 

[EDM]

Find us an "unwavering" statement subsequent to 2000.

More than a statement, how about Office Live, Live Mail,
OneCare Live etc etc:
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2005/nov05/11-01PreviewSoftwareBasedPR.mspx

MS is initially rolling these subscription services out as free or
paid by advertising, to hook in as many people as possible.

 

[Garrot]

More than a statement, how about Office Live, Live Mail,
OneCare Live etc etc:
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2005/nov05/11-01PreviewSoftwareBasedPR.mspx

MS is initially rolling these subscription services out as free or
paid by advertising, to hook in as many people as possible.

And they are all optional. MS keeps spamming me at Hotmail to sign up
for Live Mail beta but I just ignore them.

 

[Garrot]

I could go on, but hopefully you get the idea.

No, I don't. I haven't seen anything you posted that says Vista will be
subscription based. And what does .Net and video drivers have to do with
subscription?

 

[Garrot]

For me too as of ~1999, which I admit is a long time in computer years,
I had huge problems which were never resolved. Gamma was the main
problem for me at the time but I had some other issues with 3d games
that forced me to buy a new video card after lack of a response from
ATI. Thing is ~7 years isn't that long for being P.O.ed at a manufacturer.

Great hardware but problems with drivers/running in anything other then
common modes. It was like they only tested 800x600 in 256 color mode and
left everthing else from EGA to other VGA modes to users to figure out.
Serious lack of Q.C. and testing IMO.

1999 makes your opinion of ATI drivers now irrelevant.

 

[Garrot]

I have an ATI x800 and I haven't had a bad driver from ATI in years.
Actually I am using a driver from Oct 05 and it works great. I have stopped
updateing drivers as I don't see how they can do any better than the one I
am using.

Sometimes you need the latest drivers if you buy a new game that has a
graphics glitch and it is fixed by the new driver. Sometimes newer
drivers give better performance too. Mostly though newer drivers are to
support newer video cards so there is no need to update if you have an
oldr card and no issues with the drivers you are using.

 

[Garrot]

Define "bad". The ATI drivers shipped for years with ThinkPads
don't allow setting different resolutions on internal and external
displays. I had to go to http://www.omegadrivers.com/ to get
drivers that allowed one to chose different resolution and refresh
rates.

Those are still ATI drivers, they've just been modified slightly. I use
NGO modified Nvidia drivers because they give me better functionality.
What's the difference?

 

[J. Clarke]

More than a statement, how about Office Live, Live Mail,
OneCare Live etc etc:
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2005/nov05/11-01PreviewSoftwareBasedPR.mspx

MS is initially rolling these subscription services out as free or
paid by advertising, to hook in as many people as possible.

I'm sorry, but I don't see offering web based communication services as
being anything to get excited about.

 

[J. Clarke]

Define "bad". The ATI drivers shipped for years with ThinkPads
don't allow setting different resolutions on internal and external
displays. I had to go to http://www.omegadrivers.com/ to get
drivers that allowed one to chose different resolution and refresh
rates.

If the Omega drivers allow this and the IBM drivers do not, this is a choice
made by IBM, not ATI. Remember, ATI does not provide drivers for their
mobile chips directly to end users.

 

[Rick Cortese]

1999 makes your opinion of ATI drivers now irrelevant.

Beg to differ. Even with the high turn over in electronics you are still
going to have a large number of the same people and procedures for Q.C.,
testing, and programming. I mean Microsoft is an good example of decades
of poor performance and buggy software: It happens.

Of course if you have knowledge to the contrary i.e. ATI fired tje
entire crew and started from over from scratch I would accept it.

 

[EDM]

Beg to differ. Even with the high turn over in electronics you are still
going to have a large number of the same people and procedures for Q.C.,
testing, and programming. I mean Microsoft is an good example of decades
of poor performance and buggy software: It happens.

Of course if you have knowledge to the contrary i.e. ATI fired tje
entire crew and started from over from scratch I would accept it.

That's what happened to Matrox, except the "crew" quit
instead of being fired. The company never did recover
in the 3D market.

 

[The little lost angel]

No, I don't. I haven't seen anything you posted that says Vista will be
subscription based. And what does .Net and video drivers have to do with
subscription?

AFAIK, locally M$ have been pushing for businesses to adopt a 3 year
subscription/payment plans for WindowsXP licenses instead of paying
once off. Seems like it's a good hint of things to come, get them used
to the idea of paying smaller amounts over a fixed number of years
then slowly comes the perpetual annual subscriptions.

 

[Judd]

Whatever. They tried to break into the market, their product was
marginally competitive for a short period of time, but they soon fell
behind, apparently unable to keep up with the competition. They then
exited the market after the one product. I'd call that getting their
asses kicked.

"The competition"? There was only 1 real player and that was MS who bought
the rights to the technology and the team. MS made sure there was never any
"competition" to their standard. Intel made a very solid API that may not
have had all the features at it's earliest stage, but was clearly the
fastest and had some of the sharpest graphics. Intel hardly got their asses
kicked. They just didn't want to piss off MS who demanded that they didn't
fragment the market and compete.

 

[Isaac W.]

"The competition"? There was only 1 real player and that was MS who bought
the rights to the technology and the team. MS made sure there was never any
"competition" to their standard. Intel made a very solid API that may not
have had all the features at it's earliest stage, but was clearly the
fastest and had some of the sharpest graphics. Intel hardly got their asses
kicked. They just didn't want to piss off MS who demanded that they didn't
fragment the market and compete.

As I've heard, Intel is a pushover. I don't think it took much for MS
to push them around. If you look at how they shoot themselves in the
foot regularly, Its fairly evident. They really do need a better
management line to shape up their political movements and to
siginificantly reduce the "foot shooting" incidents. I'm still not sure
that the middle management layoff is a good or bad thing.