[BWX]

As of now.

People voted 5 and below: 505

People voted 6 and above: 447

That kind of says something.. I hope they put out a new build soon.

[The_Neon_Cowboy]

Originally Posted by Dazog

Its not .NET's fault for all of this ATi just hasn't coded well enough using it.

And Like I say they should have let us try a beta of this a LONG time ago to help them work out these kinks Instead of there supposedly leet team of testers.

I mean that would have stopped ALOT of this backlash toward something that has been in testing for months now.

Pretty poor job of beta testing by the team or not enough coding by ATi?

[color=#f0f0f0]First off there is a large difference between driver testing and software testing. As for compatibility that’s one of the many reasons it’s based on .net. [/color]

[color=#f0f0f0]Most people beefs come from it requiring .net and saying it uses a huge amount of memory. [/color][color=#f0f0f0]Yet 0% loss in performance [/color]

What exactly is your compaint? ( don't say .net or memory)

Originally Posted by BWX

As of now.

People voted 5 and below: 505

People voted 6 and above: 447

That kind of says something.. I hope they put out a new build soon.

Yea, a lot of people clicked a low number and never bothered to install it once they read the word “.NET”



Other people read the glowing reviews of "massive memory usages etc." gave it a low number and moved on….



Other read that the full download pack was 40 MB and moved on….
low number


A lot of people gave it one quick look an unloaded it…
gave it a low number...


[color=#f0f0f0]In my honest opinion, people are not giving it a fair shake....[/color]

[Robert McClelland]

Updated I just installed my doom3 with CCC and runs great no skipping jerky graphics Even with AA on and AF on at 4by4 I stay this new CCC much better then old one

[BWX]

I gave it a low number because I think it is a recourse hog. Plus it was buggy and a lot of functions didn't work.. didn't really have anything to do with the .Net thing.. The reason why some things didn't work were probably due to some service I have disabled or some tweak I have done that the CCC didn't like... But still, it didn't work and there was no list of needed services besides .Net that ATI gave us to go by..


Anyway- I was just reading a review over at [H] and saw this:

"Users have been asking for this control for a very long time now and it looks like ATI is finally going to provide users this option. NVIDIA owners have come to know this option that is called "Digital Vibrance." ATI will be introducing a similar feature called Radiance in a future CATALYST Control Center version."
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjU4LDQ=



That is a step in the right direction, and if they (ATI) can come out with a less buggy build and a list of "conditions" that need to be present in your WinXP installation and configuration in order for the thing to work, I'll have no problem installing it and giving it a fair score... I just think this first build is too "beta"..

[Dazog]

Its nice that you try and defend them Neo but I haven't seen anyone from ATi reassuring us or telling us things are getting better.

This seems to be one storm they are just hiding from, I mean with this BAD PR, it hurts them next time people choose to buy a New card.

When I talk about the Control panel its a Huge bloated Window that Doesn't Conform to anything, I can't dock it resize it or Put it into the Display properties
I have to use this huge window.

I don't know if they did test studies to find out, But I don't know ONE person who wants a big rounded window they can't control the size of, Its in the way.

I hope ATi learns from this and makes the changes we want ASAP.

Remeber I am the customer, and If I am not happy,
No matter how much the PRO ATi Fanboys say I am wrong or stupid, I won't buy another ATi card and ATi loses because of them, not the other way around.

So this isn't a ATI SUcks here I come nvidia.

ATi isn't showing me a good reason to use my awsome ATi card without ALOT of hassle and annoyances.

I want a Control Panel I can Customize with ease and It isn't SO damn BIG

P.S. I don't need a Damn splash screen EVERYTime I launch the damn thing, I know what I clicked.

[Bicka]

I might give this 1 more point if I could on the basis that I can make desktop shortcuts to my colour profiles now.

Because the ati drivers mess up so much and return the colour and brightness to default, I've put 2 shortcuts on my desktop. One with a slightly lower brightness on it because the control panel still believes its at my custom settings and won't rerun the first shortcut.

Not a perfect solution but its the best I've gotten to work with since I got this card last year

[BWX]

Originally Posted by Dazog

When I talk about the Control panel its a Huge bloated Window that Doesn't Conform to anything, I can't dock it resize it or Put it into the Display properties
I have to use this huge window.

I don't know if they did test studies to find out, But I don't know ONE person who wants a big rounded window they can't control the size of, Its in the way.

It isn't really that big, but I agree that it is dumb that you cannot resize it or anything- You must be running really low res if it's that big, I'm running 1200 x 900 and it was actually kinda small-

[studbagel9]

My two cents follow:
To whomever said that they had BSOD every once in a while, do you mean actual blue screens of death ala windows 9x or like, something else? I ask this because of my following experiences with CCC. I was running Omega 4.7's, and I thought that I should probably uninstall them first, so I did, ran drivercleaner, uninstalled, blah blah blah installed the 4.8 catalysts, rebooted, installed the CCC. After that reboot it said that it couldn't find any ATi hardware, and that I would have to install the correct drivers. I manually installed the drivers though device manager and tried it again. Here's where I thought it got really interesting. If I tried to open the program from the Display Properties -> settings -> advanced menu my computer would reboot. Everytime, instantly, with no explanations. However if I opened it from the taskbar, it would open, though it was shaky. One of the times I got it to open correctly I began to fiddle with it. I really like the fact that it has those application specific profiles, but the actual setting up of those profiles seems a little difficult to set. I think that if in a future release, there was a "new" button, instead of just a writable little input line there with a save button it would be better. In this "new profile" dialog box there could be a place to name the profile, select when the profile is selected (hotkey or by application) and then have the individual settings for AA and AF. Some other goodies could be cool too, like advanced clocking settings. For example, if you were overclocking your card but a particular game wasn't too stable with the clock (::cough:: doom3 ::cough: it could like realize that the game was crashing through some sort of analysis of the executable that was running when the card crashed and set a profile option to revert the clock from whatever the user had set in the universal setup back to default, then ramp the speed back up after the executable closed. So I guess like per game overclocking, underclocking would be kind of cool, but maybe impractical.
I think that ATi could also stand to work on the overall interface of this program. It seemed clunky to me, and I think that it could be streamlined by making the menu's more like the legacy cp's. I know it would seem like a step backward but people like regularity, and if you try to change something like the driver control panel which has been around pretty much unchanged since at least the 8500 (when I first started using ATi products) odds are it will be met with skepticism at best.
For these reasons, among all of the aforementioned performance issues, I give the CCC a 3. It is a good idea, but the thing felt like a beta to me, something that still had a while to go before it was released to the public. Well if you read all that, and you find redundant information, I'm sorry, I didn't have the patience to read through 300 posts and pick out quotes like Neon_Cowboy did.
Thanks for reading

[Dazog]

Originally Posted by BWX

It isn't really that big, but I agree that it is dumb that you cannot resize it or anything- You must be running really low res if it's that big, I'm running 1200 x 900 and it was actually kinda small-

1024x768 on my desktop

according to the last web servay I read 800x600 was still the most dominate with 1024x768 in second place.

[BassLake]

Lots and Lots of FPS for F1C. Get a Gig, A64, video card of choice, and lie to your wife. It's a Dx8-7 hog.

Then again what the hell do I know.

[Sargentwhitey]

I was actually beginning to like the CCC.... even though I had reinstall drivers twice to get it to work... it worked beautifully for one system startup... but after a restart... it said my ATi drivers were not functioning and it would not start up... it was kind of depressing... so I removed it... maybe it'll work better with me with the ATi 4.9 Catalyst....

[Maniak]

Originally Posted by Widkidone

Here is a tweak that i found that will help:

Yeah, a tweak based on the assumption that the CCC is using tons of memory. And since this assumption is completely wrong, this is all a big pile of crap...

Originally Posted by Dazog

Its not .NET's fault for all of this ATi just hasn't coded well enough using it.

More probably (for the reaction time, bugs and such), especially if they're still new with it. And since according to Chaos, the released build is not what is could have been, we'll just see what the next public release will fix/improve.

Originally Posted by BWX

I gave it a low number because I think it is a recourse hog.

Based on what ?

Originally Posted by Dazog

1024x768 on my desktop

according to the last web servay I read 800x600 was still the most dominate with 1024x768 in second place.

Not really. There are still many people in 800x600, but 1024x768 is dominant. And people with Radeon-class cards running their desktop at 800x600...

[BWX]

Originally Posted by Maniak

Based on what ?

What do you think? maybe the fact that it HOGS RECOURSES compared to the regular CP. 180mb of ram usage compared to 106mb before installation.... Argue all you want, I know what's up.

[Maniak]

Originally Posted by BWX

What do you think? maybe the fact that it HOGS RECOURSES compared to the regular CP. 180mb of ram usage compared to 106mb before installation.... Argue all you want, I know what's up.

Strange, I would have bet it was about this
Now if no one can convince you that it doesn't mean a thing, not even the inexistant effect on performance, prepare yourself to end up with the same conclusion for each and every .NET app that will come your way.

ATI will maybe reduce the apparent usage, .NET2 will probably reduce it even more next year, but it will always look like it's using far too much memory. That is, until it's needed.

If you know what's up, and it's not this, maybe you can explain exactly what it is ? Maybe the CCC is the only .NET app that doesn't display this behaviour ?

[Zardon]

Originally Posted by BWX

What do you think? maybe the fact that it HOGS RECOURSES compared to the regular CP. 180mb of ram usage compared to 106mb before installation.... Argue all you want, I know what's up.

its how .net works, it releases memory dynamically without a performance hit, its been explained in this thread before.

Server Linux OSes work on roughly the same principal.

[petri1]

I have one question i tryed it a quicky what i saw was that i can´t put OGL options like in old CP is it like i put #D options it also auto puts OGL the same settings ??


coz i don´t know what OpenGL settings are since i can´t find the tab that is all i wanna know about this new CP adn if it is liek the most say taht it dosen´t take alot of ram then i will give it a fair chance just wanna know where to change OGL settings taht´s it what i need

[Chaos]

yes the open gl settings and D3D settings are now combined other than the few options listed under API Specific

[BWX]

Originally Posted by Zardon

its how .net works, it releases memory dynamically without a performance hit, its been explained in this thread before.

Server Linux OSes work on roughly the same principal.

I heard what they said and everything, but I still don't really like it... Hey, I used win98se up until a couple years ago- when 256mb or ram was enough to run the OS and any game of your choice. The only way I'll really be able to tell is when I get the thing installed properly, which I haven't done yet... I think I know what the problem was now, I just have to try it again.

[Shuflie]

Originally Posted by No_Style

- What happened to disabling the System tray start up from within the control panel? I shouldn't have to manually remove it.

Try looking in the preferences menu at the top of the control centre, you need to press the down arow or else you just get to change the skin.

[petri1]

hi guys i am experiencing some problems teh new CCC freezezs and in taskmanfer there is two cli.exe and even though i shutdown the CCC there still is one CLI active should it be so and why does it freeze i can´t do anything as soon as i do it freezes and i unistalled it reinstalled it no luck i even uninstalled everythin that has to do with ATI CP Drivrs and so on so i installed the hole pack with CCC drivers etc.

yes .net is installed didn´t have these issues earllier but now i do

anyone who might know what the issue is??

[BMG_Cya=-]

This thing sounds great! Off to install it now.

Seriously, this thing sounds like it needs alot of work, and some re-thinking. As long as it's not mandatory, and doesn't have any performance benefits, I'll wait for the re-make. (I'm still getting over all the benefits SP2).

I didn't rate it, as I didn't try it.

[Mocca]

I see that some people in here, Neon Cowboy eg., simply adores the .net environment. Fair enough. Yet I still don't wanna be forced to install some 3rd party programme that takes ressources(no matter how big/small they are) to be able use a controlpanel. Have a whole environment running to have one lil controlpanel.... Seems kinda stupid and unnecessary

.net might be a "totally awsome friggin cool and kickass" environtment for programmers, but why the h... do I, as a normal average ATi buyer, even have to think about having to install it to use a controlpanel? The cp/bundled drivers should be all I need to have my card running optimal with advanced options.

- An yet another thing - I don't wanna be forced/tricked into using yet another MS programme that needs to be constantly patched/updated etc. to keep my comp safe from viruses/hackers/backdoors; especially not for as puny a thing as a cp...

Imo it is really unnecessary using .net for this.

[Robert McClelland]

If your intel user this program might be for you it loads apps alot faster http://downloadfinder.intel.com/scri.../iaa23_enu.exe

[Son_of_Thunder]

really don't like it...same problems as previously mentioned, a resource hog that lets me do the same amount as the old one could.

i personally am really disappointed, ATi can do better than this.

btw...it took 4 minutes to load up on my system...i used it for a day and it extended my boot time by 40 seconds.

it's off my system until a real revolution comes along

[The_Neon_Cowboy]

Originally Posted by Mocca

I see that some people in here, Neon Cowboy eg., simply adores the .net environment. Fair enough.





[color=red]No, but it results I no performance loss and is used by more and more applications.Microsoft is pushing it and improving it so as sure as the sun rises tomorrow you’ll eventually have it or need iton you pc weather you want it on not …[/color]



Yet I still don't wanna be forced to install some 3rd party programme that takes ressources(no matter how big/small they are) to be able use a controlpanel.



[color=red]Since when is Microsoft a 3rd party to windows? They make windows just in case you didn’t know. It’s even been added to XP sp2 as an optional component.[/color]



Have a whole environment running to have one lil controlpanel.... Seems kinda stupid and unnecessary



[color=red]There are other apps you may wont or need and actually a few sites show less recourses/processes used after installing .net.. It’s a frame work believe it or not you likely have other frame works on your system for other programs…[/color]



.net might be a "totally awsome friggin cool and kickass" environtment for programmers, but why the h... do I, as a normal average ATi buyer, even have to think about having to install it to use a controlpanel? The cp/bundled drivers should be all I need to have my card running optimal with advanced options.



[color=red]Because companies use .net because it saves then up to ½ the development time… not to mention windows compatibility, working with etc is relatively easy…[/color]



An yet another thing - I don't wanna be forced/tricked into using yet another MS programme that needs to be constantly patched/updated etc. to keep my comp safe from viruses/hackers/backdoors; especially not for as puny a thing as a cp...



[color=red]Then you better switch to linux or mac, and even then there will stil be secrity patches and updates need to keep your system secure[/color]



Imo it is really unnecessary using .net for this.



[color=red]Actually it’s a requirement and it stupid to spend twice the time, money and resources just so you don’t have to load something that should already be there..[/color]

...

Originally Posted by sthunder

really don't like it...same problems as previously mentioned, a resource hog that lets me do the same amount as the old one could.

First off it add new features and will have even more features secondly you guys really need to re read Zardons post as many time as it take for you to understand it. If not ask questions we will try to help you understand...

Originally Posted by Zardon

its how .net works, it releases memory dynamically without a performance hit, its been explained in this thread before.

Server Linux OSes work on roughly the same principal.

It uses the resourses since they are not being used in the first place nor are they needed at the time. When you open something that needs thouse resourses .net lets go of them and uses much less....

how many times must this be explained?

[AIW Guru]

Neon Cowboy, You call +30seconds boot time 'no performance difference."? While I agree that what you're saying will EVENTUALLY be the case, it's not now.

Now, I'm going to be Devil's Advocate in this post.

It's my PERSONAL opinion that the upper management at ATI which sets the development direction and okays projects needs to wake up here.

They should get their core driver working right before making fancy .NET front ends to support longhorn that's 2-3 years away...which already exist in third party...to much higher quality.

Here's a few bits to start you off.

Fix DDC. Windows works fine with it. There is no reason for your driver to disable Windows' handling of DDC and replace it with one that does not work.

Fix OpenGL. Special DLLs for different games is 1998, not 2004. NV can do it, so it isn't impossible on Windows.

Stop lying. Telling your customers that the 'enable large file cache=currupt HDD' is a MICROSOFT problem is a dastardly thing to do. It worked in previous catalyst releases and it works with Nvidia, SIS, VIA, Matrox, Intel, etc so how the hell is that a MICROSOFT problem. It's a B.S. Scapegoat and it's a serious, serious, serious bug. It amazes me that people at rage3d repeat this sh!t like it's gospel. 'ATI doesn't need to fix it - it's microsoft's problem!'

If you absolutely MUST release APK-style ugly front ends, make sure they're properly tested, validated and qualified for commercial release. Because, you know, it's face-reddening when freeware apps do the same job and better, without being a 56k terrorisingly huge download.

edit: Oh, and get back with the 'unified driver architecture' commitment you made and now have broken...and that whole concurrent WDM release thing....try to get back to keeping your word on that.

[The_Neon_Cowboy]

Originally Posted by AIW Guru

Neon Cowboy, You call +30seconds boot time 'no performance

[color=#ff0000]So you don't use your pc you just reboot it all day eh? LOL[/color]
[color=red]Doesn’t take that much longer on my system… longest thing that to loads is my anti vius and firewall by far...has no noticeable effect on any games [/color][color=red]FPS[/color][color=red] ... [/color]

difference."? While I agree that what you're saying will EVENTUALLY be the case, it's not now.

[color=red]Give MS time.. [/color]


Now, I'm going to be Devil's Advocate in this post.



It's my PERSONAL opinion that the upper management at ATI which sets the development direction and okays projects needs to wake up here.



They should get their core driver working right before making fancy .NET front ends to support longhorn that's 2-3 years away...which already exist in third party...to much higher quality.


[color=red]Who Says it’s for long horn support? You also need to realize matrox already has a .net based solution, ATI recently released theirs, NVIDIA is supposedly working on one… [/color]



[color=red].Net isn’t for long horn ROFL, how short sided . It’s a frame work on which to base applications it’s been around for quite a while… it works on like 98 / NT / me / 2000 / XP / 2003 … http://msdn.microsoft.com/netframewo...o/default.aspx[/color]



Here's a few bits to start you off.



Fix DDC. Windows works fine with it. There is no reason for your driver to disable Windows' handling of DDC and replace it with one that does not work.



[color=red]Actually that works here for me on or off make no difference but then again unlike many I load my monitor drivers maybe that has something to do with it.[/color] [color=red]Other people systems I don't know.[/color]



Fix OpenGL. Special DLLs for different games is 1998, not 2004. NV can do it, so it isn't impossible on Windows.



[color=red]They shouldn’t have to, just because NV does it don’t mean ATI should have to… NV always released a driver that’s better for a specific game it’s called optimizing and it’s frowned upon… it’s not a good thing… ATI is working on thier opengl as a whole...[/color]



Stop lying. Telling your customers that the 'enable large file cache=currupt HDD' is a MICROSOFT problem is a dastardly thing to do. It worked in previous catalyst releases and it works with Nvidia, SIS, VIA, Matrox, Intel, etc so how the hell is that a MICROSOFT problem. It's a B.S. Scapegoat and it's a serious, serious, serious bug. It amazes me that people at rage3d repeat this sh!t like it's gospel. 'ATI doesn't need to fix it - it's microsoft's problem!'


[color=red]Actually your mis-informed I’ve read up on this issue in the past. I should add that have access to information you don’t. [/color]

[color=red]Fact: it’s a problem within windows, ATI is not Microsoft they can’t fix it even if they could. Why? It’s operating system related[/color]

[color=#ff0000]there is the ati info base on it….[/color]
[color=red]http://www.ati.com/support/infobase/4217.html[/color]

[color=red]there are a few work around some settings and MS reg keys you can change that have solved it for some people. I don't know if it works large system cache is ment for coprate severs (large File severs. etc) not you home pc or gameing machine in the 1st place... [/color]





If you absolutely MUST release APK-style ugly front ends, make sure they're properly tested, validated and qualified for commercial release. Because, you know, it's face-reddening when freeware apps do the same job and better, without being a 56k terrorisingly huge download.



[color=red]? lost me…. Are your referring to the look .net again?[/color]



edit: Oh, and get back with the 'unified driver architecture' commitment you made and now have broken...



[color=red]Since when have they had different drivers for different cards? One driver all radeon cards, laptops excluded for obvious reasons such as optional features supported or not supported as chosen by the laptop mfg. drivers are updated 12 times a year....[/color]



and that whole concurrent WDM release thing....try to get back to keeping your word on that.



[color=red]? lost me…. Wdm’s are released packed with each driver set, other then that I don’t know about when their updated but just looking at a couple sets inf’s it looks like their updated each release..[/color]

....

[Silent Buddha]

A little off topic but had to respond to the last few posts.

DDC is a bit broken in the Cat. 4.8 drivers. I have a Sun Micro 24.1" LCD on the DVI port. Reading the EDID information (what DDC retrieves) shows that all information is correct about the monitor. IE - It's a digital interface, resolutions, power saving functions, etc. And wonder of wonders it works fine on pre-Cat 4.8s and on both my X800 and 9700pro. I believe this is an issue with the new support added for reading EDID data from HDTVs. As my LCD also has composite video and s-video in. But it is NOT an HDTV and does not have a HDTV or TV tuner built it. I believe the driver is incorrectly interpreting this as an HDTV and trying to get HDTV H-sync and V-sync rates which this monitor does NOT support. Thus it is failing to properly initialize the monitor when the drivers are loaded. And there is no way to force it to read it properly. Now, both windows fail safe VGA driver and pre 4.8 Catalysts correctly read and interpret this data. I'm hoping that Catalyst 4.9 will not have this issue.

Monitor INFs are NOT needed if your monitor properly supports DDC and has the correct EDID information. That is the whole point of DDC and modern monitors being PnP. I rather dislike how the myth is still perpetrated that a Monitor INF is needed when the monitor INF for a properly made monitor contains the exact same information as what DDC will retreive from said monitor. The only problems that occur with with this are either [1] Monitor firmware (EDID) has the incorrect information about said monitor (Some Dell 2001FP monitors, some Samsung monitors are known to have this issue) or [2] the graphics driver doesn't read/interpret/implement DDC and/or EDID correctly.

I always get a laugh when people freak out when they see PnP monitor in display properties. This is what you SHOULD be seeing if everything is working correctly AND the monitor is not listed in the Windows database. Oh, that reminds me, that's the only difference a monitor INF will make, it will provide Windows with the name of the monitor. And if I remember correctly, both Nvidia and ATIs drivers specifically ignore the Monitor INF if they can read the monitors EDID through DDC. Someone please correct me if you can show documentation by Nvidia or ATI that proves me wrong.

Anyway, back on topic. .Net isn't "just for programmers." Just like Java isn't "just for programmers." I do believe to run a Java app requires that Java be installed on a computer? As both .Net and Java are JIT (is that the correct term?) compilers. Unlike Java however, .Net appears to be easier to code and has a rather large corporation in Microsoft pushing it. And considering that Longhorn will be heavily based on .Net, I would not be surprised to see more and more applications ported to .Net in the coming 2 years as companies gear up for Longhorn.

IE - anyone NOT already working on a .Net interface for the graphics card will be on the short end of the stick when Longhorn launches.

As for memory, .Net and .Net applications aren't the only applications that try to allocate more memory than they will use. Most applications will try to request from Windows as much memory as they might possibly use. And in most cases Windows will grant it to the application IF there is memory available. However, Windows also has the ability to reclaim (free up) any memory that is allocated but not in use. If you have a variety of programs installed that load when windows loads, chances are you will see a rather large memory footprint. However, not all of that memory is actively being used. It has just been allocated in case an application needs it. This helps slightly with memory speed but more so in that it attempts to keep memory blocks for applications contiguous. As always however, if that memory is needed for another application, Windows will take it right back. Assuming said application hasn't done the unthinkable and its programmers have coded it to lock up all the memory allocated to it whether it is using it or not. Something that I believe .Net addresses directly for .Net applications.

Silent Buddha

[apoch003]

Umm... Microsoft is the writer and publisher of .NET....

Therefore, is isn't 3rd party software.

[Maniak]

Originally Posted by Mocca

Yet I still don't wanna be forced to install some 3rd party programme that takes ressources(no matter how big/small they are) to be able use a controlpanel.

And if it takes no additionnal resources and allows the other apps to get more memory when needed ? Because the way .NET manages the memory, especially the way it consolidates it and is able to release bigger chunks, is potentially better for the other apps running when memory is scarce.

Originally Posted by Mocca

Have a whole environment running to have one lil controlpanel.... Seems kinda stupid and unnecessary

There is no environment running. .NET isn't a virtual machine that continually interprets the code. It compiles the code on the fly (once) and it's real native code that is executed (potentially more optimised than with non-.NET apps since the JIT compiler can use optimizations specific to your hardware).

Originally Posted by Mocca

.net might be a "totally awsome friggin cool and kickass" environtment for programmers, but why the h... do I, as a normal average ATi buyer, even have to think about having to install it to use a controlpanel?

What do you need to run Java applications ? Same deal here. But much lighter. .NET was for programmers only 2 years ago, when it was first released. Now it's coming to the end users, like it or not. It's not going to wait for Longhorn

Originally Posted by Mocca

Imo it is really unnecessary using .net for this.

That's ATI's judgment call.

Originally Posted by AIW Guru

While I agree that what you're saying will EVENTUALLY be the case, it's not now.

Apparently it's starting now

Originally Posted by AIW Guru

It's my PERSONAL opinion that the upper management at ATI which sets the development direction and okays projects needs to wake up here.

I'd say that's what they did. They're looking at the future (which is very close to becoming the present). Better for them to start working with .NET now (with the initial problems that are bound to happen) than waiting for the last moment and being left in the dust.

Give 'em some credit, and more than that, give 'em some time. They'll make it worthwhile.

Originally Posted by AIW Guru

They should get their core driver working right before making fancy .NET front ends

I doubt if the driver team is the same as the CCC one. Not the same kind of development.

Originally Posted by AIW Guru

to support longhorn

Completely wrong. There have been 2 versions of .NET already (1.0 and 1.1), the 2.0 version will be out in the near future, do you think they would do that if it was only aimed at Longhorn ?

When Longhorn comes, Windows developers are supposed to already be familiar with .NET. Maybe not Java developers, but Win32/MFC and such. And guess what ? Meaning that more and more .NET applications will be available to end users before then.


Anyway, your complaints about the drivers may well be justified, but unless the same guys are developing both (which I highly doubt), it's not related to the CCC.