| Revision as of 16:38, 17 December 2006 editMureninC (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,560 editsm →Stallman incident should be removed← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 15:22, 28 December 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk | contribs)Bots7,667,193 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}}: 3 WikiProject templates. (Fix Category:Pages using WikiProject banner shell with invalid parameters)Tag: Talk banner shell conversion |
| (144 intermediate revisions by 65 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C| |
|
I think that ati should redirect here whenever you type ATI or ati. |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Canada|importance=Low|toronto=Yes|toronto-importance=Low}} |
|
I assume that over 90% of people typing those keywords are looking for this article. |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Companies|importance=Mid}} |
|
I just changed the logotype by uploading ATI_Logo_0903.png |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Computing|importance=Low|hardware=Yes|hardware-importance=Mid}} |
|
If I should rather have deleted existing ATI logo.png and replaced it with the new image, say so (or just fix it). As it is, there are two ATi logo images on Misplaced Pages, one of which no longer matches the official one (and it had that ugly placement of (r) anyway). |
|
|
|
}} |
|
] 20:25, 16 May 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis|archiveprefix=Talk:ATI Technologies/Archives/|format=Y|age=26297|index=yes|archivebox=yes|box-advert=yes}} |
|
|
{{Broken anchors|links= |
|
|
* <nowiki>]</nowiki> The anchor (#Tessellations and computer graphics) has been ] before. <!-- {"title":"Tessellations and computer graphics","appear":{"revid":26620891,"parentid":25772059,"timestamp":"2005-10-27T14:21:15Z","replaced_anchors":{"Tesselations and computer graphics":"Tessellations and computer graphics"},"removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"disappear":{"revid":330870246,"parentid":330869688,"timestamp":"2009-12-10T14:18:01Z","replaced_anchors":{"Tessellations and computer graphics":"Tessellations and computer models"},"removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"very_different":false,"rename_to":"Tessellations and computer models"} --> |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== AMD-ATI == |
|
I've corrected the acronym (it's NOT Allied Telesyn International), added some extra bio info (location, names of founders). There is much more that can be said for this company, but I'll leave it to the vidiots. - quanta, 7 July 2004 |
|
|
This needs coverage of Mobility Radeon, and an explanation of why I can't see the model number from Apple System Profiler... ] 07:43, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AMD still seems to have an ATI Technologies ULC. left, is this related to the original ATI Technologies Inc. and should it be written into the article (? ] (]) 16:14, 9 December 2022 (UTC) |
|
It seems to me that this page was written by the marketing department. Does it seem this way to anyone else? I hesitate to call a NPOV violation but the wordage seems better to be in a flyer than Misplaced Pages. ] 04:29, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Siri == |
|
:I agree on this. It just reads horrible. ] 00:12, 6 December 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Qiero a Siri ] (]) 22:02, 19 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
What's with the "NOTE: If you are planning on using or using linux (OS) Its not worth the hassel to get an ATI graphic card since there poor drivers arent real good. If you plan to use linux I would recommend an Nvidia Graphic card." at the end? I recommend we delete it, it seems just a teeny bit unprofessional. --] 13:25, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I am wondering if calling the Radeon Xpress 200 ATI's first chipset is really true. I seem to recall a few motherboards out there boasting ATI chipsets (such as the 320M for the regular Athlons and the 340M for Pentium 4's and more recently the 9100 IGP for the Pentium 4's) while I guess the 3x0 series might not qualify as chipsets in the truest sense of the word (as, I seem to recall the boards using southbridges from VIA or some other manufacturer) I'm pretty sure the 9100 series had southbridges manufactured by ATI, thus making it ATIs first true chipset. For now I'll just leave the article as-is because I may very well be wrong but someone who has more time on their hands may want to look into the issue a little more. - Kilroy1231 3.3.05 |
|
|
|
|
|
ATI used an ALI southbridge for the earliest chipsets, but that changed with the . Since I wrote 30% of the present ATI page, excuse me if I have no hesitation in correcting this nonsense. Well spotted. Okay, I just split motherboards out to their own section. Its just a stub, but its a start. When I get the time /energy, I still want to fill back the current trends section to at least the Rage chips. ] 20:36, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, I've now changed the layout, to fit with the one used on the ] page. ATI and nVidia are really twin companies these days, doing the same sort of things, so I think it makes sense to sync the layout for consistency of look and feel. ] 14:02, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I just put in a vote for deletion for a new page on the 9250. Jeesh, here is the rule guys. We do a page for each NOTABLE series of cards. The same rule for both ATI and nVidia. Copying out benchmark scores and spec sheets on every part nVidia or ATI ever made, really is not what an encyclopedia is about. ] 20:26, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, I put a ATI makes crappy cards section. If anyone wants to challenge me in blowing over 500 dollars on defective cards go ahead. Its no coincedence that their cards glitch up...unless I have hidden mind powers that somehow break the things I buy. ] 01:26, 04 July 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:This gen ATI seems to be faltering, which is why I've decided I'm going to upgrade to a 6800 ultra instead of sticking with ATI.] 01:30, 11 July 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Why does this page ignore ATI's past mistakes/failures/questionable actions yet it lists Nvidia's? |
|
|
|
|
|
This article should be about ATI, why is every other sentence I see nVidia? Not just see nVidia - but I see over-blown publicity. This article seems a bit biased, is it really necessary to mention nVidia's name so much? |
|
|
|
|
|
ATI also made a sound card called the Stereo F/X in 1992. |
|
|
|
|
|
Well, how do you discuss ATI without reference to NVIDIA? Its like asking someone to write a history of AMD, without any mention of Intel. Thats an absurd point. Then you say its like a fan page? Well, on the one hand you say its all about NVIDIA, then in the next sentance you seem to be saying it goes on and on about ATI. A wholly inconsistent set of observations. ATI has been the world's largest discrete graphics card company for the last 2 years, the products must have been pretty wonderful in that period, to beat out a company as tough as NVIDIA. Are you going to argue the 9700 and 9800 were bad products? Because I think you'll get flamed like crazy if you edit the page to say that. ] 14:19, 12 May 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== XGI == |
|
|
|
|
|
I think the purchase of a lot of the assets from ] should be mentioned somewhere in this article. |
|
|
|
|
|
== Hollywood == |
|
|
|
|
|
NOTHING has been confirmed about this, other than it is NOT based off of any previous GPU or GPU series. ~Captain |
|
|
|
|
|
== ATI lack of drivers for linux ? == |
|
|
I don't think this : http://www.petitiononline.com/atipet/petition.html is '''24.470 times''' my own POV. ] 12:09, 14 June 2006 (UTC) and also user:Yug |
|
|
:http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?atipet |
|
|
:: Just because a lot of people signed some petition does not make your assertions correct. "Linux + an ATI video card = a really slow computer"? No, I have a computer right here to disprove that. I rewrote it into a ]. ] 12:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:::For me, 24.470 signing people is not "some", and many Linux/ATI users don't know about this petition, so that probably talking about 200.000 to 1.000.000 of users. Moreover, I have a Radeon 8500 mobility and Linux, and the fact is just in front of me for the last 2 years. Afterwhat went I see and read a petition like this, I think you are really nice with ATI ("ATI's inadequate drivers" : I understand that ATI did nothing, and that Linux programmer try to fix it with "inadequate" things.). |
|
|
:::I leat this like this, and just put this discussion in the article discussion page. Yug |
|
|
::::I do not use the proprietary drivers (by principle), and my computer does not feel slow (I don't play 3D games), so "Linux + ATI = really slow computer" is not categorically true. I do think 25000 users qualify as "some", considering the many millions who are Linux users. Speculation on how many could potentially sign the petition are just that; speculation. I think the section is now on a form we can all agree on. ] 13:15, 14 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Too much plain text== |
|
|
Is anyone else a bit annoyed by the large field of text that comprises the Market trends section? Is there some sort of "Wall of text" template that can be applied to the page? I'll try and get creative to write some titles for the section, but still.] 02:51, 18 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Yeah it does look a little plain. Maybe a picture of some kind could spice it up? ] 03:50, 21 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ATi is not the proper spelling of the company's name! == |
|
|
|
|
|
The old logo might have looked like ATi, but the formal name has always been ATI. ATI stands for Array Technologies Incorporated. Get it right! :P ] 19:23, 24 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
And here's proof: ] 16:36, 10 November 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Merger or AMD buying AMD == |
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know much about business or economics and the wiki article is not particularly clear. At one place it suggests it's a merger, at another place it suggests AMD is buying ATI. So is this a merger or is AMD buying ATI? According to the AMD page it's a merger but according to Yahoo AMD is buying ATI. Also the Yahoo page states it's subject to ATI shareholder approval but doesn't mention AMD shareholder approval so again it makes me think AMD is buying ATI (although maybe they just didn't mention that shareholder approval was needed). ] 20:50, 24 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:Mergers are almost always one company buying another company, and in this case, I believe it's AMD buying ATi. So yes, it's a merger. |
|
|
::Not according to the ] article however which states the differences between mergers and acquisitions is in how they're financed... ] 15:54, 20 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Old logo == |
|
|
Is there any information on the old logo, such as why they switched to the current logo? If the old logo was shown on this article page, I don't think that removing it was a good idea. Rather than that, there should be a comparison, such as how there is a comparison in the ] article, for example. --] 10:26, 1 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Chipsets == |
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe it's time to start moving motherboard chipsets to codename series, much like the Radeon? There are going to be lot more products than just Xpress 200 and 3200 as outlined in {{tl|ATI}}, and all sorts of fancy codenames like RD480 (Xpress 1600), RD500, RD600, RS500, RS600 etc. --] <sub>(] •] )</sub> 18:52, 2 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Big Picture. == |
|
|
|
|
|
And I'm not talking metaphorically. There's a huge, obnoxious picture of a Radeon X1900XT in the middle of the page! Someone should format it to Misplaced Pages styling (I would, but I don't know how yet) or remove it. (edit: forgot to sign) --] 09:03, 4 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Done'd. -] 13:57, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Reduntant acronymn - ATI Technologies Inc? == |
|
|
|
|
|
Reading that first line is a bit disorienting. '''A'''rray '''T'''echnologies '''I'''ncorporated Technologies Incorporated? It seems this article is suffering from ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I know that ''ATI technologies'' isn't redundant, as that implies a technology of ATI. But ''ATI Technologies'' (with the capital letter) implies it is part of the name. Maybe the article ought to be moved to, lets say, ], or the like. -] 12:30, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== x800 series? == |
|
|
|
|
|
Article jumps directly from the 9xxx to the x1yyy series. I don't know much about those, so could anyone add them? ] 21:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:IIRC, the x series (pre-x1000) is an extension of the 9xxx series. For example, a Radeon X800 would be comparable to a Radeon 9800, but the X800 would have...more, I guess. I won't add anything to the article because I lack sufficient information. --] 11:59, 28 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:The X800 was nothing more than a 9800 with double the pipelines and a bit of extra MHz. There were some non-specific enhancements, but nothing really new. A more detailed explanation is on the ] page. -] 16:38, 28 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== 'a 3D accelerator for free'? == |
|
|
|
|
|
Regarding the Mach64, this sentence is difficult to understand. Is the article saying that the video card was so inexpensive, or is it referring to some 3d acceleration features that neither of the Mach64s I owned had? |
|
|
|
|
|
== Stallman incident should be removed == |
|
|
|
|
|
The paragraph about the April 2006 incident involving RMS should be removed. If nothing else it should be moved to either the article on RMS or the FSF, but I would argue it is not encyclopedia material. -] 07:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I agree. '''I'm the guy who wrote most of the ATI, NVIDIA, AMD, and other key IT pages'''. Its just too much detail for a summary page. Sadly, we have someone called ] going round the IT section vandalising pages at the moment, and none of the editors seem willing to do anything about it. He routinely breaks guidelines, and does not adhere to / respect consensus. He just reverts when I try and fix things, and correct the factual errors he has inserted. HELP! I'll try deleting the incident (AGAIN) and see what happens. Its the duty of whoever reverts to post to the discussion page, if not, I'll have to take this up with a senior editor, with a view to having the ] account suspended. ] 15:13, 17 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Example of ] at work. |
|
|
|
|
|
*http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:VIA_CoreFusion |
|
|
|
|
|
Another mess I'm trying to sort out! ] 15:33, 17 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
: Sadly, we have Timharwoodx trying to use personal attacks in order to push for ATI and AMD — no consensus was ever reached in removing the Stallman incident. Everyone, please take a look at ] and see for yourself. ] 16:33, 17 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==AVIVO== |
|
|
|
|
|
Look, I know I created the AVIVO page, but stream processing is the AMD brand for AVIVO. Its the same thing. Programming shaders to do CPU like tasks. This is a summary page, if AMD are branding CPU like functions as 'stream processing' then AVIVO is no longer relevant. Its an expired marketing term. ON a summary page, I don't see space for an expired marketing term from the (old) ATI company. Its just not relevant any longer. If you disagree, post reasons, and form a consensus before reverting the main page. As the primary author of this page, I think I deserve a voice. ] 15:21, 17 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
