Hello
  Hope this clears things...

> On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 18:42:32 +0000, rallee2{at}comcast.net wrote:
> 
> >Hello Derek and group
>  This 
> started as a bit of a lark in that around 4-5 years ago I decided to
remove OS/2 
> from my main multi-booting machine and build a dedicated, networked box
\
> Which doesn't fit in with you telling us about a brand new box running
> 2004 technology... where does 4-5 years ago come into it?  It's
> irrelevant. > You just built this machine.  If you were planning on
running OS/2 on
> it, you should have checked it out first.
> 

 I didn't think it irrelevant since I figured it explained why the new box
is not critical.  I am not dependant on it for OS/2.  I'd just like to be
now that I see how it runs on it. I did not buy the parts with OS/2 in mind
since it was destined to replace my main box which hasn't run OS/2 for 4-5
years.  As I said, it started as a lark due to the excitement that can come
with building a new machine and being happy and impressed with the results.

> I'm afraid I find your reply confusing and hard to follow.  That you
> should expect anyone to remember a thread,or even to search through
> previous messages to FIND a thread is amusing.  As I recall, your
> initial message was not in reply to anything else, which would indicate
> an on-going discussion, so I didn't bother looking back.  Now that I've
> done so, I see it was the first message on the subject you posted under
> that header...

 I don't recall asking anyone to do anything other than possibly recommend
a driver, sorry if you got confused by a series of threads that were not
linked as they dealt with individual problems with the same system.  IIRC
recommendations on changes to installation diskettes was first but it
really has little or nothing to do with video driver.  The only
"need" for overall continuity was yours, Derek, since you
questioned why I didn't buy a video card with OS/2 in mind and as I hope is
clear now, I didn't expect to run OS/2 on this card.  I'm glad you were
amused even if you misunderstood.

> ATI isn't going anywhere, and nVidia isn't going to crush them...
> Matrox fell out of the 3D race a long time ago, but there's no signs of
> this race letting up any time soon.  Competition breeds innovation, and
> they've been leap-frogging each other in the technical races for the
> last five years.

  We will see how it pans out but I have read at least 3 different articles
recently that question what is happening with ATi since the R520 GPU is
nowhere in sight and the "Crossfire" answer to nVidia SLI is as
yet vaporware.  ATi has had a rough summer and one vendor stated "It
wasn't even close this time between nVidia and ATi... one of the armies
failed to show up". Although the vendor followed by saying that
"despite the fact that this cycle is a total washout, I don't think
the race is over" suggesting that if the R520 is all that and a bucket
of chicken wings the ATi bashing will stop in a heartbeat.  ATi itself is
quoted as saying they have a perception problem and that the armchair
analysts who think the company has lost focus since taking on the Xbox 360
project are all wrong.  However I think it is fair to say that for quite a
few years now nVidia has had the cutting edge and Ati has played "me
too" catch-up. Missing a catch-up point is what has caused all the
furor in the p

ress.

> Now you've really lost me... the MSI motherboard
is an AGP, but you're
> going on about SLI, which is the newer PCI Express bus.

 BTW I only mentioned SLI to point out that the new 7800, just one of them,
is very close to 2 6800's in SLI.  I never said I was interested in having
SLI myself even if it is possible that the 7800's release might have made
me consider PCI Express at this time.  It is the smarter buy in the long
run, but I opted for cheaper now which is often the case in dead end
platforms much like the terrific bargains that can be found in socket 754
like the new Sempron 64bit 3400+ which is only $140 US right now. So, in my
case, I went with AGP to save money now while still having a moderate
upgrade path since the MSi board is socket 939.

  As for SciTech expecting to be paid for their drivers of course they do
and should and I'd be happy to pay if my card was supported fully.  Since
it is not I am looking for the best compromise solution which I think
should be proportionately cheaper and in the case of "simple" IBM
GRADD drivers, should be a part of the OpSys and not an extra charge IMHO
and as it is possible the IBM nvidia driver will run, granted in diminished
capacity, but I don't choose to pay to find out (do IBM's R&D for them
and pay for the "privilege") with even fair odds that I'd be left
with a totally useless driver.  If all I had to lose was some time, sure!,
I'd be happy to test,tweak and report to the community as I have in the
past such as with SBLive drivers when they first became available, and some
NIC solutions, etc.  Over the years I have given back considerable to the
OS/2 community and done it happily so I don't know the cause for some of
the "tude" that appeared (snipped here) in your post but th

en at the end was

> -Derek (in a pretty foul mood for a Friday... with my apologies)

and that explains it.  Apparently you are at least sometimes one of those
who feel that their mood gives license and that merely stating
"apologies" makes it OK.

It doesn't.

Jimmy





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/9rHolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

 To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/os2hardware/

 To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    os2hardware-unsubscribe{at}yahoogroups.com

 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 




---