| Revision as of 08:26, 1 November 2005 edit211.23.71.227 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 15:22, 28 December 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk | contribs)Bots7,667,472 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}}: 3 WikiProject templates. (Fix Category:Pages using WikiProject banner shell with invalid parameters)Tag: Talk banner shell conversion |
| (183 intermediate revisions by 89 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C| |
|
I just changed the logotype by uploading ATI_Logo_0903.png |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Canada|importance=Low|toronto=Yes|toronto-importance=Low}} |
|
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). |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Companies|importance=Mid}} |
|
] 20:25, 16 May 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Computing|importance=Low|hardware=Yes|hardware-importance=Mid}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{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 == |
|
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) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Qiero a Siri ] (]) 22:02, 19 February 2024 (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? |
|
