"If you followed the video graphics market back when ATI used to reign, you would know that Number Nine and Hercules were never ever close to beating Diamond's video cards utilizing the same part (ie. S3, Cirrus Logic, Tseng, Weitek, etc)"
With all due respect, you can probably cook an omelette and do the
Macarena better than can I, but your understanding of the graphics
industry is inferior. The trouble is, your arguments may sound convincing to the uninitiated.
The last time PC Magazine compared cards from Hercules, #9 and Diamond that used the same chip was on April 23rd; it was each company's S3 Vision968 card. The Hercules card had the highest Graphics Winmark (just to be clear: i t b e a t D i a m o n d) and Diamond and Hercules tied for the top Winstone spot. Interesting, since many people seem to think that PC Magazine has a pro-Diamond bias.
Also, remember that the only chipsets of those you mentioned that all three companies have used is S3 and Cirrus.
"You'll notice the slow development of ATI and Matrox product lines."
Weren't you saying earlier that ATI and Matrox have an unfair advantage? At any rate, both Matrox and ATI even beat Hercules and #9 to market with the first accelerated drivers and utility suites for Windows 95, and ATI and Matrox also beat the industry with DirectVideo drivers. They DirectVideo on their FTP sites while Diamond support reps were still blaming bad old Microsoft.
If you were referring to hardware development, remember that ATI and Matrox had 3D products out before Diamond did.
Ernie, there are plenty of good things about Diamond that you can brag about without risking venturing into territories where your arguments aren't as strong. For instance, Diamond has a darn good marketing department, probably the best in the industry, and their Windows 95 utilities are among the best (certainly better than #9's).
Rolf |
