Continued Lawsuit against MS for misrepresenting "Vista capable? designation

[apoppin]

Excuse me please.. what are you guys doing?


i posted a link to an article that showed ALL companies had problems with Brand New Vista at and after launch. Even MS. NVIDIA had the *worst* of it when they timed G80's brand new architecture with the Beta of Vista in November and then a brand new release of Vista in January. Six months later AMD stumbled with their OWN Vista drivers even though they had more time with r600's architecture.

OK, clear now? It is *FIXED*
[more-or-less]

There is no need for blame, passion or flames ... this thread is getting Way too much attention ... i thought i was just posting a *footnote* ..
- we call it history = "the past"

Learn from it

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: Martimus

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Why doesn't OSX have problems like this?

Because Apple has tight controls over the exact hardware configuration that is used in their systems. The operating system is designed to work with those known configurations. Windows isn't set up like that at all.

because OSX doesnt run any GAMES!
I surmise that less then 1% of those crashes occurred in 2d desktop environment...

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: taltamir

Originally posted by: Martimus

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Why doesn't OSX have problems like this?

Because Apple has tight controls over the exact hardware configuration that is used in their systems. The operating system is designed to work with those known configurations. Windows isn't set up like that at all.

because OSX doesnt run any GAMES!
I surmise that less then 1% of those crashes occurred in 2d desktop environment...

Any?
here's a "couple"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mac_OS_X_games

Pages in category "Mac OS X games"

The following 196 pages are in this category, out of 320 total

Or is there another OS X to which you are referring .. Apple, right?

















edited:










































i get it
':laugh:'

 

[BFG10K]

However, if you again look at the Steam data

Why are we looking at Steam data Chizow? We've already been told the market ratio was 3:2. Let me quote it again for you:

Vista's retail release was Jan. 30, 2007. In the first half of that year, Nvidia enjoyed a roughly three-to-two market share advantage in PC graphics over main discrete graphics rival Advanced Micro Devices (NYSE:AMD) (AMD), listed as ATI Technologies on the crash list.

So in summary it was a 3:2 market ratio but a 3:1 crash ratio.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: Janooo
X1900 was better than 7900.
Are the reported errors only for DX10 parts? I don't understand what you are trying to say.

Again, they were close enough to go either way depending on who you asked, quoted from AT's G71 article:

On the high end, the 7900 GTX generally performs around the X1900 XT and X1900 XTX. This isn't a blow out victory for either NVIDIA or ATI as far as performance goes, and it looks like we have some very good competition here.

No the reported errors aren't only for DX10 parts, but as some industry analysts and the Steam survey suggest, that is the demographic most likely to have upgraded to Vista or purchased Vista as the OS for their new machine during the timeframe most scrutinized. The Steam survey heavily supports this position, for gaming machines at least. Again, 87.5% of all DX10 cards in Vista are NV to-date. 75% of all cards in Vista are NV in the Steam survey.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

However, if you again look at the Steam data

Why are we looking at Steam data Chizow? We've already been told the market ratio was 3:2. Let me quote it again for you:

Vista's retail release was Jan. 30, 2007. In the first half of that year, Nvidia enjoyed a roughly three-to-two market share advantage in PC graphics over main discrete graphics rival Advanced Micro Devices (NYSE:AMD) (AMD), listed as ATI Technologies on the crash list.

So in summary it was a 3:2 market ratio but a 3:1 crash ratio.

Like the crash ratio, the 3:2 market share doesn't do us much good without more detail. We already have a quote from that very same quoted source that shows a 2:1 advantage in the desktop market. And we also have damning evidence from the Steam survey that shows NV has a stranglehold over ATI with a 3:1 edge in Vista and 8:1 lead in DX10 parts in Vista. You can follow the vague and ambiguous percentages in that article or you can use a little common sense and research to see what was really going on.

 

[apoppin]

Still going at it?

Who cares what happened a year ago? ... i believe the issues are *fixed* and we are playing a blame-game with history
-am i missing a bigger picture somehow that makes this bickering relevant?


if we *determine exactly* what happened and *all agree* - what difference will it make

the moral of this story for my book's Epilogue is this:

Every single time a brand new MS OS including a new DX set coincides with brand new GPU architecture, there are many more driver issues than "usual"

^did i miss anything?^

--it is succinct and supported by all the facts
- the only real variation here this time is that "DX10" had more of an impact than many of the earlier versions .. and it really showed with both AMD's and NVIDIA's drivers

edited

 

[Acanthus]

The vista error reporting tool was garbage anyway, at least 20 of those 490000 are me trying to get DreamScene working with beta drivers

Not to mention it blamed nvidia drivers for CPU and Memory overclocking crashes.

I certainly wouldnt use that POS for any tangible stats.