| Revision as of 01:07, 7 March 2006 edit69.176.39.38 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:09, 30 April 2006 edit undoE71 (talk | contribs)228 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| I just changed the logotype by uploading ATI_Logo_0903.png | I just changed the logotype by uploading ATI_Logo_0903.png | ||
| 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). | 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, |
] 20:25, May 16 2004 (UTC) | ||
| 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, |
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, July 7 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, |
This needs coverage of Mobility Radeon, and an explanation of why I can't see the model number from Apple System Profiler... ] 07:43, Oct 23 2004 (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) | 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) | ||
| :I agree on this. It just reads horrible. ] 00:12, |
:I agree on this. It just reads horrible. ] 00:12, December 06 2005 (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, |
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, Feb 21 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 | 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, |
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, Mar 12 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, |
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, Mar 13 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, |
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, Jun 11 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, |
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, July 04 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, |
: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, July 11 2005 (UTC) | ||
| Why does this page ignore ATI's past mistakes/failures/questionable actions yet it lists Nvidia's? | Why does this page ignore ATI's past mistakes/failures/questionable actions yet it lists Nvidia's? | ||
Revision as of 21:09, 30 April 2006
I think that ati should redirect here whenever you type ATI or ati. I assume that over 90% of people typing those keywords are looking for this article. I just changed the logotype by uploading ATI_Logo_0903.png 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). Paranoid 20:25, May 16 2004 (UTC)
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, July 7 2004 This needs coverage of Mobility Radeon, and an explanation of why I can't see the model number from Apple System Profiler... lysdexia 07:43, Oct 23 2004 (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. Chotchki 04:29, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I agree on this. It just reads horrible. Joachim.Kluge 00:12, December 06 2005 (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. --Easty 13:25, Feb 21 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 9100. 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. Timharwoodx 20:36, Mar 12 2005 (UTC)
Okay, I've now changed the layout, to fit with the one used on the nvidia 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. Timharwoodx 14:02, Mar 13 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. Timharwoodx 20:26, Jun 11 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. Marvelvsdc 01:26, July 04 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.Heraclius 01:30, July 11 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.