<strong>I'm curious as to what, exactly, people expect out of these cards? The current drivers make little or no attempt to optimize quartz using any hardware. I do think that in the future the 3D hardware will be used to accelerate certain features of quartz, but I have serious doubts as to whether the Rage 2 or Pro cards could handle it or, more to the point, be faster than software alone. Especially when the limited amount of VRAM that these cards contained is taken into account I can't see how they could even be used at all. Consider an original iMac with 2MB of VRAM; OS X needs at least an 800 x 600 screen at 16 bits to present a decent interface, and that already is using half of the memory for display purposes only. When the fact that every window and layer in the display system is double buffered, 2 or 4 MB of VRAM would simply cause too much swapping across the system bus to be feasible for acceleration. The 6MB versions would handle it a little better, but then the limitations of the chips themselves have to be considered. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if 16 or 32 MB of VRAM is a requirement for future acceleration options.
Besides, Apple is not saying that X will not run on these systems (it obviously does) but only that the realities of the display layer and the memory and speed required for it precludes the successful utilization of these particular cards. It is unfortunate that they will not be used for acceleration, but I am not willing to accept the theory that Apple is simply trying to make users upgrade. These chips and memory configurations have serious shortcomings that, apparently after investigation by Apple, simply make them untenable.
The point must also be forwarded that, even were acceleration enabled, X still would be a painful experience on any configuration that uses a Rage 2/Pro.
And before anyone raises the question... yes, I probably would crucify microsoft for the same transgression. Oh well, I'll have to deal with my own hypocrisy.</strong><hr></blockquote>
that's bull. most of quartz is stored in main ram. this is obvious as the latest 10.1.2 update reduced RAM usage by up to 30MBs because it compresses window information.
the first rev iMac can also be upgraded to 6 MB VRAM. OS X also has 3d acceleration on 8mb cards such as the iMac with rage 128 8mb and the Powerbook G3 Pismo and G4 with 8 mb ATI chipsets.
Most of quartz is stored in main ram. this is obvious as the latest 10.1.2 update reduced RAM usage by up to 30MBs because it compresses window information.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Currently yes. Most of my post was regarding future optimizations to speed 2D scrolling, drawing, etc. and, like I wrote in regards to Scott's post, I agree with adding 3D support to Rage Pro machines.
Still the Apple Apologists (TM) cant' tell me why it's okay for crApple to put a system on the supported list and then drop support for it months and months later. They tell us "updates are coming" and then months and months later, after charging for a "free" update, that there are no updates coming for "supported" systems.
Also the point I made earlier. Apple controls the hardware. They control the software. They friggen soldered the GPU to the motherboard of the computer I'm using and they can't write a friggen driver for it? Please?
Like others and myself have pointed out OpenGL worked well under 9. Why not X? If this is a ploy for Apple to sell more systems it fail. I wont buy anymore crApple systems. You can't count on support two years later. My system is still on crApplecare warrantee. If crApple will warrantee it can it still be ?legacy? hardware?
The original iMac is supported by OS X, though your definition of supported is different than their definition. OpenGL isn't supported. It's not fully- or well- supported.
It's likely, again, that Apple doesn't want to devote resources to older hardware support, that Apple wants to "encourage" people to upgrade (even if it is petty), and maybe their strained relationship with ATI has something to do with it. Pick one reason, any one. I'm not asking you to be happy with it. No one is saying it's your fault, just that the reasons are in front of you for better or worse.
you say apple doesn't wan tto devote its resources to this "legacy" support task...
Apple is a multibillion dollar company with hundreds of employees just working on OS X. Drivers for the ATI Rage Pro and IIc would likely take a team of 2-3 a month to do, if that. they already have something to start with. this is not a difficult thing to do. there is no excuse for it.
This really makes me question the big upgrade I was going to make soon... If I buy new Apple hardware, how long until OS XI comes out and Apple drops support for more crap because they are too lazy and don't want to add support for older hardware, even though they will gladly SAY it is supported?
This is pretty shitty. And whether or not Apple's motives they need to explain themselves, and why the these systems are listed as compatable.
However maybe we are pointing some of the finger in the wrong direction. Purhaps it is ATi who is unwilling to go back and right drivers for these computers. I really doubt Apple writes any drivers for ATi's products to be used with their computers. Either way this reeks, and I am glad I do not own one of these older iMacs and all. No offense, but I would kill myself if I was forced to use one of those klunkers whether or not they had OpenGL in OS X.
<strong>However maybe we are pointing some of the finger in the wrong direction. Purhaps it is ATi who is unwilling to go back and right drivers for these computers. I really doubt Apple writes any drivers for ATi's products to be used with their computers.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Maybe but as I've said before ... I didn't buy a graphics card I bougth and iMac. Apple says, "We make the hardware we make the software" not "we make the hardware, slap a graphics card on it for you no extra charge, we make the software except the graphics card driver."
<strong>This is pretty shitty. And whether or not Apple's motives they need to explain themselves, and why the these systems are listed as compatable.
However maybe we are pointing some of the finger in the wrong direction. Purhaps it is ATi who is unwilling to go back and right drivers for these computers. I really doubt Apple writes any drivers for ATi's products to be used with their computers. Either way this reeks, and I am glad I do not own one of these older iMacs and all. No offense, but I would kill myself if I was forced to use one of those klunkers whether or not they had OpenGL in OS X.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple is responsible for supporting all ATI integrated chipsets. It's an OEM part. you don't go to maxtor when your built-in drive fails or you need a driver. you go to apple. same thing with the graphic card/chip
There is a difference between supporting a product used in your computer and writing a driver to make that product compatible with an OS. Apple might do updates on their side of the line to make the product work, but that can only go so far. Its ATi that has the licenses, and patents, not to mention the authorization to do full on driver updates.
However Apple should still gives you a full explanation of whats going on. This whole one line statement with no explanation sucks.
<strong>There is a difference between supporting a product used in your computer and writing a driver to make that product compatible with an OS. Apple might do updates on their side of the line to make the product work, but that can only go so far. Its ATi that has the licenses, and patents, not to mention the authorization to do full on driver updates.
However Apple should still gives you a full explanation of whats going on. This whole one line statement with no explanation sucks.</strong><hr></blockquote>
apple is responsible for ATI integrated chipset driver support. that's what ATI says and that's why Apple releases driver updates for ATI cards shipped with macs.
I'm not going to apologize for Apple. I would like the see a driver for Rage Pro cards, and do think it would have been smart of them to produce one.
That being said, you guys that are obviously not new to the computer industry shouldn't find this news as a huge surprise.
No computer company actually strives or is capable of providing utopia computer experiences. Computers are amazing because you buy them as imperfect. You can get a refund/exchange if your microwave doesn't bake, but can you do the same if your computer crashes?
My point is, it's all ugly, and equally if not more ugly on the "other" side. Microsoft has shafted many a person too.. did you read their official response to their security problems ("please don't share hacking information with anybody, just tell us about it")?
We know your arguements, and I completely understand your points. However, assess what computer best fits your needs and accept the reality. The computer industry just sucks, and this is a perfect example.
There are many people who have printers that don't work under OS X, and other peripherals. There are many people with driver problems after migrating to WinXP (i.e. CD-R). Obsolesence is just a reality.
It would have been nice if Apple provided a disclaimer for people who were really counting on Rage support under OS X. They clearly dropped the ball here, and I won't apologize for that. However, almost everyday I hear of new "mistakes" that other companies have made (i.e. the recent XP security problems). I know that Apple is not alone.
yea, but Apple is suppose to be different. that's why we are apple users. that's why I'm an "applenut". It's suppose to be a community. Apple is suppose to take care of us, not be the corporate ass you says your 2 year old computer is legacy and won't be supported anymore.
SO much for the computer for the rest of us.. It's now the computer for those who can upgrade every 2 years
<strong>There is a difference between supporting a product used in your computer and writing a driver to make that product compatible with an OS. Apple might do updates on their side of the line to make the product work, but that can only go so far. Its ATi that has the licenses, and patents, not to mention the authorization to do full on driver updates.
However Apple should still gives you a full explanation of whats going on. This whole one line statement with no explanation sucks.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm not going to apologize for Apple. I would like the see a driver for Rage Pro cards, and do think it would have been smart of them to produce one.
That being said, you guys that are obviously not new to the computer industry shouldn't find this news as a huge surprise.
No computer company actually strives or is capable of providing utopia computer experiences. Computers are amazing because you buy them as imperfect. You can get a refund/exchange if your microwave doesn't bake, but can you do the same if your computer crashes?
My point is, it's all ugly, and equally if not more ugly on the "other" side. Microsoft has shafted many a person too.. did you read their official response to their security problems ("please don't share hacking information with anybody, just tell us about it")?
We know your arguements, and I completely understand your points. However, assess what computer best fits your needs and accept the reality. The computer industry just sucks, and this is a perfect example.
There are many people who have printers that don't work under OS X, and other peripherals. There are many people with driver problems after migrating to WinXP (i.e. CD-R). Obsolesence is just a reality.
It would have been nice if Apple provided a disclaimer for people who were really counting on Rage support under OS X. They clearly dropped the ball here, and I won't apologize for that. However, almost everyday I hear of new "mistakes" that other companies have made (i.e. the recent XP security problems). I know that Apple is not alone.
The computer industry just sucks...</strong><hr></blockquote>
OS X is still slow on G4 Powermacs. To while about old(er) graphics cards is a waste of time. Things must changer here or there. I think that apple moving to OS X stopped being 'smooth' when all applications had to be 'carbonized'. I am sorry for all of you with older graphics cards, but I am sure that Apple didn?t do this just to spite you. Look at graphics cards today compared to 2 years ago, there is quite a difference. All of you must also remember that there is much more power in the damn GPU its self than in the drivers.
Safe to assume that you mean the word "apologist" to be an insult, Scott? Frankly, you're getting tiresome to say the least. Suit yourself. If you want to alienate yourself from everyone else on top of all this, its your prerogative.
Comments
<strong>I'm curious as to what, exactly, people expect out of these cards? The current drivers make little or no attempt to optimize quartz using any hardware. I do think that in the future the 3D hardware will be used to accelerate certain features of quartz, but I have serious doubts as to whether the Rage 2 or Pro cards could handle it or, more to the point, be faster than software alone. Especially when the limited amount of VRAM that these cards contained is taken into account I can't see how they could even be used at all. Consider an original iMac with 2MB of VRAM; OS X needs at least an 800 x 600 screen at 16 bits to present a decent interface, and that already is using half of the memory for display purposes only. When the fact that every window and layer in the display system is double buffered, 2 or 4 MB of VRAM would simply cause too much swapping across the system bus to be feasible for acceleration. The 6MB versions would handle it a little better, but then the limitations of the chips themselves have to be considered. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if 16 or 32 MB of VRAM is a requirement for future acceleration options.
Besides, Apple is not saying that X will not run on these systems (it obviously does) but only that the realities of the display layer and the memory and speed required for it precludes the successful utilization of these particular cards. It is unfortunate that they will not be used for acceleration, but I am not willing to accept the theory that Apple is simply trying to make users upgrade. These chips and memory configurations have serious shortcomings that, apparently after investigation by Apple, simply make them untenable.
The point must also be forwarded that, even were acceleration enabled, X still would be a painful experience on any configuration that uses a Rage 2/Pro.
And before anyone raises the question... yes, I probably would crucify microsoft for the same transgression. Oh well, I'll have to deal with my own hypocrisy.</strong><hr></blockquote>
that's bull. most of quartz is stored in main ram. this is obvious as the latest 10.1.2 update reduced RAM usage by up to 30MBs because it compresses window information.
the first rev iMac can also be upgraded to 6 MB VRAM. OS X also has 3d acceleration on 8mb cards such as the iMac with rage 128 8mb and the Powerbook G3 Pismo and G4 with 8 mb ATI chipsets.
<strong>
Most of quartz is stored in main ram. this is obvious as the latest 10.1.2 update reduced RAM usage by up to 30MBs because it compresses window information.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Currently yes. Most of my post was regarding future optimizations to speed 2D scrolling, drawing, etc. and, like I wrote in regards to Scott's post, I agree with adding 3D support to Rage Pro machines.
Also the point I made earlier. Apple controls the hardware. They control the software. They friggen soldered the GPU to the motherboard of the computer I'm using and they can't write a friggen driver for it? Please?
Like others and myself have pointed out OpenGL worked well under 9. Why not X? If this is a ploy for Apple to sell more systems it fail. I wont buy anymore crApple systems. You can't count on support two years later. My system is still on crApplecare warrantee. If crApple will warrantee it can it still be ?legacy? hardware?
I know I know It's all my fault.
The original iMac is supported by OS X, though your definition of supported is different than their definition. OpenGL isn't supported. It's not fully- or well- supported.
It's likely, again, that Apple doesn't want to devote resources to older hardware support, that Apple wants to "encourage" people to upgrade (even if it is petty), and maybe their strained relationship with ATI has something to do with it. Pick one reason, any one. I'm not asking you to be happy with it. No one is saying it's your fault, just that the reasons are in front of you for better or worse.
you say apple doesn't wan tto devote its resources to this "legacy" support task...
Apple is a multibillion dollar company with hundreds of employees just working on OS X. Drivers for the ATI Rage Pro and IIc would likely take a team of 2-3 a month to do, if that. they already have something to start with. this is not a difficult thing to do. there is no excuse for it.
Bad move, Apple.
Apple totaly blew it on this one. No one can talk this one down.
However maybe we are pointing some of the finger in the wrong direction. Purhaps it is ATi who is unwilling to go back and right drivers for these computers. I really doubt Apple writes any drivers for ATi's products to be used with their computers. Either way this reeks, and I am glad I do not own one of these older iMacs and all. No offense, but I would kill myself if I was forced to use one of those klunkers whether or not they had OpenGL in OS X.
<strong>However maybe we are pointing some of the finger in the wrong direction. Purhaps it is ATi who is unwilling to go back and right drivers for these computers. I really doubt Apple writes any drivers for ATi's products to be used with their computers.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Maybe but as I've said before ... I didn't buy a graphics card I bougth and iMac. Apple says, "We make the hardware we make the software" not "we make the hardware, slap a graphics card on it for you no extra charge, we make the software except the graphics card driver."
<strong>This is pretty shitty. And whether or not Apple's motives they need to explain themselves, and why the these systems are listed as compatable.
However maybe we are pointing some of the finger in the wrong direction. Purhaps it is ATi who is unwilling to go back and right drivers for these computers. I really doubt Apple writes any drivers for ATi's products to be used with their computers. Either way this reeks, and I am glad I do not own one of these older iMacs and all. No offense, but I would kill myself if I was forced to use one of those klunkers whether or not they had OpenGL in OS X.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple is responsible for supporting all ATI integrated chipsets. It's an OEM part. you don't go to maxtor when your built-in drive fails or you need a driver. you go to apple. same thing with the graphic card/chip
However Apple should still gives you a full explanation of whats going on. This whole one line statement with no explanation sucks.
<strong>There is a difference between supporting a product used in your computer and writing a driver to make that product compatible with an OS. Apple might do updates on their side of the line to make the product work, but that can only go so far. Its ATi that has the licenses, and patents, not to mention the authorization to do full on driver updates.
However Apple should still gives you a full explanation of whats going on. This whole one line statement with no explanation sucks.</strong><hr></blockquote>
apple is responsible for ATI integrated chipset driver support. that's what ATI says and that's why Apple releases driver updates for ATI cards shipped with macs.
I'm not going to apologize for Apple. I would like the see a driver for Rage Pro cards, and do think it would have been smart of them to produce one.
That being said, you guys that are obviously not new to the computer industry shouldn't find this news as a huge surprise.
No computer company actually strives or is capable of providing utopia computer experiences. Computers are amazing because you buy them as imperfect. You can get a refund/exchange if your microwave doesn't bake, but can you do the same if your computer crashes?
My point is, it's all ugly, and equally if not more ugly on the "other" side. Microsoft has shafted many a person too.. did you read their official response to their security problems ("please don't share hacking information with anybody, just tell us about it")?
We know your arguements, and I completely understand your points. However, assess what computer best fits your needs and accept the reality. The computer industry just sucks, and this is a perfect example.
There are many people who have printers that don't work under OS X, and other peripherals. There are many people with driver problems after migrating to WinXP (i.e. CD-R). Obsolesence is just a reality.
It would have been nice if Apple provided a disclaimer for people who were really counting on Rage support under OS X. They clearly dropped the ball here, and I won't apologize for that. However, almost everyday I hear of new "mistakes" that other companies have made (i.e. the recent XP security problems). I know that Apple is not alone.
The computer industry just sucks...
SO much for the computer for the rest of us.. It's now the computer for those who can upgrade every 2 years
<strong>There is a difference between supporting a product used in your computer and writing a driver to make that product compatible with an OS. Apple might do updates on their side of the line to make the product work, but that can only go so far. Its ATi that has the licenses, and patents, not to mention the authorization to do full on driver updates.
However Apple should still gives you a full explanation of whats going on. This whole one line statement with no explanation sucks.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple Apologist (TM)
<strong>Scott, Applenut:
I'm not going to apologize for Apple. I would like the see a driver for Rage Pro cards, and do think it would have been smart of them to produce one.
That being said, you guys that are obviously not new to the computer industry shouldn't find this news as a huge surprise.
No computer company actually strives or is capable of providing utopia computer experiences. Computers are amazing because you buy them as imperfect. You can get a refund/exchange if your microwave doesn't bake, but can you do the same if your computer crashes?
My point is, it's all ugly, and equally if not more ugly on the "other" side. Microsoft has shafted many a person too.. did you read their official response to their security problems ("please don't share hacking information with anybody, just tell us about it")?
We know your arguements, and I completely understand your points. However, assess what computer best fits your needs and accept the reality. The computer industry just sucks, and this is a perfect example.
There are many people who have printers that don't work under OS X, and other peripherals. There are many people with driver problems after migrating to WinXP (i.e. CD-R). Obsolesence is just a reality.
It would have been nice if Apple provided a disclaimer for people who were really counting on Rage support under OS X. They clearly dropped the ball here, and I won't apologize for that. However, almost everyday I hear of new "mistakes" that other companies have made (i.e. the recent XP security problems). I know that Apple is not alone.
The computer industry just sucks...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple Apologist (TM)
OS X is still slow on G4 Powermacs. To while about old(er) graphics cards is a waste of time. Things must changer here or there. I think that apple moving to OS X stopped being 'smooth' when all applications had to be 'carbonized'. I am sorry for all of you with older graphics cards, but I am sure that Apple didn?t do this just to spite you. Look at graphics cards today compared to 2 years ago, there is quite a difference. All of you must also remember that there is much more power in the damn GPU its self than in the drivers.