zlacker

[return to "3dfx: So powerful it’s kind of ridiculous"]
1. ChuckM+25[view] [source] 2023-03-05 05:41:02
>>BirAda+(OP)
My first video accelerator was the Nvidia NV-1 because a friend of mine was on the design team and he assured me that NURBs were going to be the dominant rendering model since you could do a sphere with just 6 of them, whereas triangles needed like 50 and it still looked like crap. But Nvidia was so tight fisted with development details and all their "secret sauce" none of my programs ever worked on it.

Then I bought a 3DFx Voodoo card and started using Glide and it was night and day. I had something up the first day and every day thereafter it seemed to get more and more capable. That was a lot of fun.

In my opinion, Direct X was what killed it most. OpenGL was well supported on the Voodoo cards and Microsoft was determined to kill anyone using OpenGL (which they didn't control) to program games if they could. After about 5 years (Direct X 7 or 8) it had reached feature parity but long before that the "co marketing" dollars Microsoft used to enforce their monopoly had done most of the work.

Sigh.

◧◩
2. useful+t7[view] [source] 2023-03-05 06:19:28
>>ChuckM+25
> Microsoft was determined to kill anyone using OpenGL ... After about 5 years (Direct X 7 or 8) it had reached feature parity but long before that the "co marketing" dollars Microsoft used to enforce their monopoly had done most of the work.

I was acutely aware of the various 3D API issues during this time and this rings very true.

◧◩◪
3. wazoox+Gj[view] [source] 2023-03-05 09:16:51
>>useful+t7
Yup, remember when they "teamed up" with SGI to create "Farenheit"? Embrace, extend, extinguish...
◧◩◪◨
4. pjmlp+Tm[view] [source] 2023-03-05 10:08:38
>>wazoox+Gj
As if SGI didn't had their share in Farenheit's failure.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_(graphics_API)

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. wazoox+UH[view] [source] 2023-03-05 13:52:28
>>pjmlp+Tm
Holy cow I found a nest of Microsoft fans. From your link:

> By 1999 it was clear that Microsoft had no intention of delivering Low Level; although officially working on it, almost no resources were dedicated to actually producing code.

No kidding...

Also the CEO of SGI in the late 90s was an ex-Microsoft and bet heavily on weird technical choices (remember the SGI 320 / 540? I do) that played no small role in sinking the boat. Extremely similar to the infamous Nokia suicide in the 2010s under another Microsoft alumni. I think the similarity isn't due to chance.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. justso+0U[view] [source] 2023-03-05 15:21:47
>>wazoox+UH
>infamous Nokia suicide

Nokia would had killed itself either way, with Elop it still tried to flop.

Every Nokia fanboy cries about EEE, but blissfully forgets what a turd was 5800 Xpress Music, which came half a year later than iPhone 3G.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. Nursie+i31[view] [source] 2023-03-05 16:14:18
>>justso+0U
Nokia was massive outside of the US, it had name recognition bigger than apple in Europe even in 2009 and still pumped out some gems like the N900.

Yes it had huge systemic issues. Structural problems, too many departments pumping out too many phones with overlapping feature sets, and an incoherent platform strategy.

But Elop flat-out murdered it with his burning platforms memo and then flogged the scraps to the mothership. It came across as a stitch-up from the word go.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. justso+ub1[view] [source] 2023-03-05 16:59:16
>>Nursie+i31
By 2009 writing was on the wall and it wasn't 'Nokia'.

You know why it was 'Xpress Music'? Because Nokia was years late for a 'music phone'. Even Moto had E398 and SE had both music and photo. By 2009 Nokia had a cheap line-up for the brand zealots (eaten up by Moto C-series and everyone else), a couple of fetishist's phones (remember those with floral pattern and 8800?) and.. overpriced 'commucators' with subpar internals (hell, late PDAs on Xscale had more RAM and CPU power) and incompatible with anything, including themselves, mess of Symbian.

Elop not only allowed MS to try the waters with mobiles, but actually saved many, many workplaces for years. Alternative for that would had been a bankrupcy around 2013.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. Nursie+Yx2[view] [source] 2023-03-06 02:02:50
>>justso+ub1
That's some pretty revisionist history IMHO. By 2009 the company was in the shit, but it had money and market share.

> Alternative for that would had been a bankrupcy around 2013.

The alternative would have been some restructuring by someone with a better idea than crashing the company and selling the name to his real bosses at MS.

The company was in trouble but salvageable. Elop flat-out murdered it, and it looked a lot like he did it to try to get a name brand for MS to use for its windows phones, which were failing badly (and continued to do so).

[go to top]