Where to complain about Matrox's drivers...

[El Diablo]

I'm not the only person who think that Matrox make some great cards. But their drivers are very bad and betaish.. Where do u all complain about that?
I think we all should tell Matrox, about their situation in the open_gl world.
I know Matrox are aware of their situation, but anyway lets all complain, so they can get their ass in gear, and make some decent drivers..
In the future we will se Nvidea, VooDoo and others including same features as Matrox, but if they continue to use the same stable drivers as they use to, where will Matrox then be?
I love the quality of Matrox, so lets kick their ass so we are able to continue buying their cards.........
where should we all complain, what email-adress do we use??

Bye, bye from a biiiig Matrox fan

------------------
Asus P3B/f
Pentium III 500mhz
Soundblaster Live
128mb PC100 ram
Matrox G400 DH Max
Logitech Gaming Mouse USB

[DosFreak]

Try www.Matrox.com and post in the forums. Please do not complain to Matrox here. If you complain in their forums they will most definetly see it.

------------------
C:\DOS
C:\DOS\RUN
\RUN\DOS\RUN

[YoKoMo [1]]

Well, until Nvideork and VooPoo clean up lousy 2d images i'll stick with supposedly buggy Matrox. What exactly are you having trouble with? Maybe if you post your troubles we can help you out.

[El Diablo]

YoKoMo ur right about Matrox clean and crisp 2d picture. I love the Matrix cards, and maybe I was a bit angry when I posted my message, I just have some anoying troubles using TGL. The biggest problem is the "whitescreen issue" with QIII. I need to start and end QIII using 800X600X32X32... what's that for a solution? U have to turn of dualhead, when playing QIII..?
I mean QIII and games alike are the number one games people are playing, so I just thought it would be normal to program some decent drivers for games like those mentioned. I know the TGL is better than the full open_gl, but do we want some VooDoo-ish gamedrivers - minisomething?
I don't hate Matrox I have used Mystique, Millenium and G400 and I really like their picture and features. But a good, fast and stable open_gl is def. something I wish they have made.... If Nvidea gets a little bit nicer on the pictureside, I think Matrox would be my second choice...
But OK it was not a complain I would make, rather a wish, advice or something like that. So let's clap their back instead, and wish them good luck - programming a fast and stable open_gl.....

Sorry for being mad

------------------
Asus P3B/f
Pentium III 500mhz
Soundblaster Live
128mb PC100 ram
Matrox G400 DH Max
Logitech Gaming Mouse USB

[Caprice]

Take out that TGL .dll file out of Q3 and play the game!...the latest drivers with the
new ICD is about as fast as TGL...but then
again you can just sit there and moan....

Caprice

------------------
P3-450 o/c 558
Abit BH6
128 PC100
G400 SH 32M o/c MAX spex
SB Live X-Gamer
Pioneer 6X DVD
Maxtor 10 Gig H.D.
Fujitsu 13 Gig H.D.
Win98 SE
Samsung Synchmaster 17"
Logitech C/L Mouse/Kybrd
Altec Lansing ACS56
oh yea! and a 3M Precise
Mouse pad!!

[El Diablo]

....hmmm OK I admit I've been a little angry lately, I will now perform the operation you have suggested and play some QIII....
Thanx for your positive influence....

CU

------------------
Asus P3B/f
Pentium III 500mhz
Soundblaster Live
128mb PC100 ram
Matrox G400 DH Max
Logitech Gaming Mouse USB

[Gurm]

Diablo:

And yes, dual-head and OpenGL gaming have always been kind of a no-no with the Matrox drivers. But why complain?

You sound like this:

My advanced graphics card uses features not available on any other card. But when I enable those features, then I can't play games? Do I have to disable those features (which have nothing to do with gaming) in order to play games? I don't want to! I want to have lousy image quality and be able to ... oh, wait! If I had a Nvidia card I wouldn't HAVE dual-head, so I wouldn't have to disable it...

I'm not really flaming you, just trying to point out how silly you sounded earlier. You can't compare apples and oranges. It's like the Firing Squad review that shows that the GeFarce has higher FPS than the G400. DUH. But the image quality blows, and it doesn't have EMBM or Dual-Head. So... who cares?

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

[HollyBerri]

You <u>go</u>, Gurm...

-----------------
Holly

[Gurm]

Ok Holly, although I was expecting that particular silly pun any ol' time, what with my name and all...

I have this mental image to go along with you saying that... *shrug* oh well, probably best to keep such things to oneself.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

[Alec]

I own a G200, so I can only speak for myself.

I don´t have any complaints whatsoever, besides the earlier problems with OPEN GL games. After the ICD came out, I have been playing every game, always at 800x600 (I have a 15-inch monitor), some games at 32-bit, always quality options at the maximum, and it´s a beauty, speed has been increasing steadily with the drivers (in most games). No fuss.

I never had driver problems, or if I had them, I didn´t recognize them as such.

I NEVER HAD A PROBLEM OR A CRASH OR A DEFECT WITH QUAKE 3 - AND I HAVE PLAYED IT TO EXHAUSTION WITH THE CARD OVERCLOCKED TO 100MHZ CORE - HOW ABOUT THAT?

I just want to serve as an example that Matrox is not so bad driver-wise. A friend of mine owns a Banshee and the gamma control is shitty, he has to brighten the monitor to play some games. Other friend of mine returned a Geforce Annihilator cause he had 2D defects. I mean, every brand has problems.
Summing up:

I´M A SATISFIED CUSTOMER!!!

Profile:
INTEL CELERON 433, G200 SD 8MB AGP (BIOS 2.6)
INTEL ATLANTA 440LX
SOUNDBLASTER PCI 128, 128 MB SDRAM, 4.3 WESTERN DIGITAL EIDE CAVIAR HD,
CREATIVE 24X CD-ROM,
AOC 5VLR 15",
Latest Powerdesk and DirectX.
WIN 98 SE portug.

------------------
Remember folks:
"Computers are useless. They can only give you answers"
Pablo Picasso

[This message has been edited by Alec (edited 16 March 2000).]

[El Diablo]

.. I get it Gurm. I just had a baaaad day, at the time the message was created. I love my DH max, and I can't wait till my new Sony 19" arrives to my country.......

MATROX RULEZ MATROX RULEZ MATROX RULEZ

:-)

------------------
Asus P3B/f
Pentium III 500mhz
Soundblaster Live
128mb PC100 ram
Matrox G400 DH Max
Logitech Gaming Mouse USB

[nufan]

when you say the new poewrdesk is as fast as turboGL, what do you mean?

in 16bit 8x6 i get 47fps with powerdesk and 52 with turboGL

and its a lot smoother with tgl..

just my experiences..

-]nufan[-

------------------
win98/win2k/linux
Dual celeron 366@550
abit bp6
128mb ram
9gb udma/66
18gb udma/66(running on the udma/33 controller)
g400 32mb DH
yamaha 4416e 4x4x16 cdrw
creative 2x dvd drive
mx300sound + mx25 digital out (a3d digital sound, baby)
generic ne2000 isa netcard

[El Diablo]

..in the beginning of a game ur right, the powerdesk is a little more choppier than turbo gl. After a minute of caching, I really can't see any difference. But ok in benchmarking u might get different scores. But anyway the new drivers run smooth after a minute and I don't get the anoying errors I did with turbo gl....and that's fine with me!

:-)

------------------
Asus P3B/f
Pentium III 500@600
Soundblaster Live
128mb PC100 ram
Matrox G400 DH Max
Logitech Gaming Mouse USB
Everglide QIII Black Attack Pad

[YoKoMo [1]]

I Do tend to agree with you on the OpenGL side of things, but you have to remember that this is really their first try at a real OpenGL driver. 3DFX still doesn't have a good OpenGL driver and how long have they been working on it? At least Matrox driver keeps getting better and better, You don't hear much about how improved 3DFX's OGL driver is. As far as Nvidiot goes, as long as 2D sucks, they won't receive a penny from me. Matrox Q1 is almost gone, will we see G450 soon? Got some money burning a hole in my wallet and I think it's time for a Vid Card upgrade.

[Alec]

I agree with you, YoKoMo.

After owning a Matrox card and getting used to its image quality, I can´t imagine myself buying another card... to me, visuals always were more important than speed. It´s not that Matrox cards lag very much behind other cards speedwise (sometimes they don´t) - I think that the difference is negligible, the visuals make up for the difference.

[This message has been edited by Alec (edited 16 March 2000).]