> You've taken the words out of mouth. The OGC1 is going to be designed and= > =20 > marketed to be a general-purpose graphics card, to compete in a field that = > is=20 > dominated by nVidia and ATi. In order to succeed well enough to be able to= > =20 > create an OGC1.1, OGC2 or whatever, we need to sell lots of them and make=20 > lots of money.
A general-purpose card to compete against nVidia and ATi? Are you serious? PCI only. No AGP. No PCIe. No laptops. No STB. No high-end CAD. No "l00t" high-end gaming. (All important if you believe the reviews.) No video. (There goes a huge number of sales.) And support for serious monitors is now in question. On the plus side there will be documentation, allowing high quality drivers to be written for BSD/Linux/Plan9/Mach/Minux/BeOS/OS-X/etc. > Putting things like jumpers on a board cost money. Each jumper will increa= > se=20 > the cost of each board by about =A31 I wasn't suggesting that the pins need to be lovingly installed by Swiss watchmakers. If a pin costs a pound the rest of the board must cost thousands. > extra testing time per board Board test was automated 25 years ago. > It's important to realize that the OGC1 is not supposed to be everything to= > =20 > everyone. Agreed. I don't see anyone lobbying for high-end gaming. Way too much to bite off. > What the target market need is a 2D/3D graphics card which is fully support= > ed=20 > out of the box on free operating systems, assuming typical hardware. I don't see what the target market for this chip is. It has too little for a general purpose computer, and too much (meaning too expensive) for a kiosk/pda type application. _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
