Idiotic ATI website

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

Why did they go and change it again? Now you're only like 17 clicks away
from finding your download--which contains 17 brand new bugs, incidentally.
Something is definitety severely wrong with these morons. I'm shocked
they're smart enough to put out any sort of product at all...
39 answers Last reply
More about idiotic website
  1. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    J wrote:

    > Why did they go and change it again? Now you're only like 17 clicks away
    > from finding your download--which contains 17 brand new bugs,
    > incidentally.
    > Something is definitety severely wrong with these morons. I'm shocked
    > they're smart enough to put out any sort of product at all...

    I count 5 clicks from the homepage to the Windows "open or save" box. Where
    do you get "like 17"?

    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
  2. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    J <speechee2@hotmail.com> wrote:
    > Why did they go and change it again? Now you're only like 17 clicks
    > away from finding your download--which contains 17 brand new bugs,
    > incidentally. Something is definitety severely wrong with these
    > morons. I'm shocked they're smart enough to put out any sort of
    > product at all...

    I agree that the site is hard to use. The fonts are too small to read on
    any high res system, and the layout too big to read on a system that doesn't
    have any drivers installed. The menus are designed for IE only, and often
    freak out with Mozilla or Thunderbird.
    I gave up trying to find a BIOS on the site -- if anyone has managed to
    navigate to that, you're far more patient than I am.

    Mind, the nVidia site isn't *that* much better. And Matrox won't even let
    you into their site unless you declare what business segment they should put
    you in. Their driver download page, though, is something that both ATI and
    nVidia should take a good look at. There's actual *text* descriptions that
    help the customer make the right choice.
    http://www.matrox.com/mga/support/drivers/
    The ATI and nVidia sites, on the other hand, are horrible if you don't know
    the exact jargon (and use the right browser and desktop resolution).

    Regards,
    --
    *Art
  3. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
    news:d143oc0m2d@news4.newsguy.com...
    > J wrote:
    >
    > > Why did they go and change it again? Now you're only like 17 clicks
    away
    > > from finding your download--which contains 17 brand new bugs,
    > > incidentally.
    > > Something is definitety severely wrong with these morons. I'm shocked
    > > they're smart enough to put out any sort of product at all...
    >
    > I count 5 clicks from the homepage to the Windows "open or save" box.
    Where
    > do you get "like 17"?

    I hope you're not serious! I got it from a dictionary...it's called
    hyperbole.

    Anyway at first I couldn't even find any mention of a WindowsMe driver I
    needed. Until I noticed a "more..." which you have to click to get to the
    full list for the category. That's so plainly idiotic I conclude that they
    or their web designer was on heroin at the time. The design they had before
    was really quite good and that model should have been kept. What made them
    go to huge dumb and cluttered bulleted text lists? Really quite stupid I
    say.

    Also, once you tell it what system you have, it could list all the available
    downloads. Why do you have to go to 18 different pages to get drivers, then
    MMC, then, etc.? Not smart.

    This reminds me of Multimedia Center. That trashware changes each version
    to suddenly include completely random new bugs for no apparent reason.
  4. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    Arthur Hagen wrote:

    > J <speechee2@hotmail.com> wrote:
    >> Why did they go and change it again? Now you're only like 17 clicks
    >> away from finding your download--which contains 17 brand new bugs,
    >> incidentally. Something is definitety severely wrong with these
    >> morons. I'm shocked they're smart enough to put out any sort of
    >> product at all...
    >
    > I agree that the site is hard to use. The fonts are too small to read on
    > any high res system,

    I didn't have any trouble adjusting the font size.

    > and the layout too big to read on a system that
    > doesn't
    > have any drivers installed.

    Viewing at full screen at 640x480 wasn't any great burden for me under IE or
    FireFox--didn't try it with any others.

    > The menus are designed for IE only, and often
    > freak out with Mozilla or Thunderbird.

    Works fine for me under Konqueror and Mozilla. Took me a while to get
    anywhere with Lynx, but that's probably because I don't know Lynx very
    well. Still was able to navigate to the drivers with no trouble.

    > I gave up trying to find a BIOS on the site -- if anyone has managed to
    > navigate to that, you're far more patient than I am.

    When did they _ever_ have a BIOS on the site for anything but Macs?

    > Mind, the nVidia site isn't *that* much better. And Matrox won't even let
    > you into their site unless you declare what business segment they should
    > put
    > you in. Their driver download page, though, is something that both ATI
    > and
    > nVidia should take a good look at. There's actual *text* descriptions
    > that help the customer make the right choice.
    > http://www.matrox.com/mga/support/drivers/
    > The ATI and nVidia sites, on the other hand, are horrible if you don't
    > know the exact jargon (and use the right browser and desktop resolution).

    Now let's see, on the ATI site you need to know your OS, your video board,
    and whether you want MMC. Doesn't seem that hard to me.
    >
    > Regards,

    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
  5. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    Apparently the site is designed to work with product registration, so you'll
    get custom-filtered driver downloads and support FAQs.

    Interesting enough it uses SSL, and will log you off after 10 minutes of
    inactivity.

    --
    "War is the continuation of politics by other means.
    It can therefore be said that politics is war without
    bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed."


    "J" <speechee2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:28aZd.3620$N8.124353@news20.bellglobal.com...
    > Why did they go and change it again? Now you're only like 17 clicks away
    > from finding your download--which contains 17 brand new bugs,
    incidentally.
    > Something is definitety severely wrong with these morons. I'm shocked
    > they're smart enough to put out any sort of product at all...
    >
    >
  6. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "First of One" <daxinfx@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:572dnSxscrsSMqjfRVn-2Q@rogers.com...
    > Apparently the site is designed to work with product registration, so
    you'll
    > get custom-filtered driver downloads and support FAQs.

    That seems to be the case. I've never been a big fan of giving personal
    information to those who don't really need it, and I really hate those
    custom-filtering things. They're great for those who have one computer,
    don't know much about this stuff, and want to have their hand held, but it's
    a pain for those of us who work on more than one computer, assist friends
    and family, or add aftermarket stuff. Dell's site has caused me much
    annoyance. I installed a mini-PCI network/modem in a Dell laptop that
    didn't come with one from the factory, and even though this was a Dell part
    from another model, finding the right driver for it was pure hell, made
    worse when that custom stuff kept filtering out everything else.

    > Interesting enough it uses SSL, and will log you off after 10 minutes of
    > inactivity.

    That, too, is a pain, and I hope they drop it. Try having more than one
    window open on their sight. heh

    Pagan
  7. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 09:01:02 -0800, "Pagan" <DirtySanchez@chonch.com>
    wrote:

    >"First of One" <daxinfx@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >news:572dnSxscrsSMqjfRVn-2Q@rogers.com...
    >> Apparently the site is designed to work with product registration, so
    >you'll
    >> get custom-filtered driver downloads and support FAQs.
    >
    >That seems to be the case. I've never been a big fan of giving personal
    >information to those who don't really need it, and I really hate those
    >custom-filtering things. They're great for those who have one computer,
    >don't know much about this stuff, and want to have their hand held, but it's
    >a pain for those of us who work on more than one computer, assist friends
    >and family, or add aftermarket stuff. Dell's site has caused me much
    >annoyance. I installed a mini-PCI network/modem in a Dell laptop that
    >didn't come with one from the factory, and even though this was a Dell part
    >from another model, finding the right driver for it was pure hell, made
    >worse when that custom stuff kept filtering out everything else.
    >
    >> Interesting enough it uses SSL, and will log you off after 10 minutes of
    >> inactivity.
    >
    >That, too, is a pain, and I hope they drop it. Try having more than one
    >window open on their sight. heh
    >
    >Pagan
    >

    Discussion about the changes to the download page.. the vote so far is
    4139 to 1062..


    http://www.driverheaven.net/showthread.php?t=69940&page=1&pp=15


    Pluvious
  8. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "Pluvious" <Pluvious@knowhere.com> wrote in message
    news:vtmb311nuiv9d6ff192jgp9qr4n8gf61vj@4ax.com...
    > On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 09:01:02 -0800, "Pagan" <DirtySanchez@chonch.com>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >"First of One" <daxinfx@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > >news:572dnSxscrsSMqjfRVn-2Q@rogers.com...
    > >> Apparently the site is designed to work with product registration, so
    > >you'll
    > >> get custom-filtered driver downloads and support FAQs.
    > >
    > >That seems to be the case. I've never been a big fan of giving personal
    > >information to those who don't really need it, and I really hate those
    > >custom-filtering things. They're great for those who have one computer,
    > >don't know much about this stuff, and want to have their hand held, but
    it's
    > >a pain for those of us who work on more than one computer, assist friends
    > >and family, or add aftermarket stuff. Dell's site has caused me much
    > >annoyance. I installed a mini-PCI network/modem in a Dell laptop that
    > >didn't come with one from the factory, and even though this was a Dell
    part
    > >from another model, finding the right driver for it was pure hell, made
    > >worse when that custom stuff kept filtering out everything else.
    > >
    > >> Interesting enough it uses SSL, and will log you off after 10 minutes
    of
    > >> inactivity.
    > >
    > >That, too, is a pain, and I hope they drop it. Try having more than one
    > >window open on their sight. heh
    > >
    > >Pagan
    > >
    >
    > Discussion about the changes to the download page.. the vote so far is
    > 4139 to 1062..
    >
    >
    > http://www.driverheaven.net/showthread.php?t=69940&page=1&pp=15
    >

    Thanks for the link.

    Pagan
  9. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "J" <speechee2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:28aZd.3620$N8.124353@news20.bellglobal.com...
    > Why did they go and change it again? Now you're only like 17 clicks away
    > from finding your download--which contains 17 brand new bugs,
    incidentally.
    > Something is definitety severely wrong with these morons. I'm shocked
    > they're smart enough to put out any sort of product at all...
    >
    >
    They've also established a new help centre which doesn't let you contact
    them by email anymore. I was in the middle of an email discussion with a
    customer care contact when 'kaboom', I got an automated "unmanned address"
    message and a link to the new no-help centre. End of discussion!
  10. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "J" <speechee2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:28aZd.3620$N8.124353@news20.bellglobal.com...
    > Why did they go and change it again? Now you're only like 17 clicks away
    > from finding your download--which contains 17 brand new bugs,
    > incidentally.
    > Something is definitety severely wrong with these morons. I'm shocked
    > they're smart enough to put out any sort of product at all...
    >
    >
    I agree - the old layout was far easier for downloading drivers etc ..
  11. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    Pagan wrote:

    > "First of One" <daxinfx@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > news:572dnSxscrsSMqjfRVn-2Q@rogers.com...
    >> Apparently the site is designed to work with product registration, so
    > you'll
    >> get custom-filtered driver downloads and support FAQs.
    >
    > That seems to be the case. I've never been a big fan of giving personal
    > information to those who don't really need it, and I really hate those
    > custom-filtering things. They're great for those who have one computer,
    > don't know much about this stuff, and want to have their hand held, but
    > it's a pain for those of us who work on more than one computer, assist
    > friends
    > and family, or add aftermarket stuff. Dell's site has caused me much
    > annoyance. I installed a mini-PCI network/modem in a Dell laptop that
    > didn't come with one from the factory, and even though this was a Dell
    > part from another model, finding the right driver for it was pure hell,
    > made worse when that custom stuff kept filtering out everything else.

    The machine I used to access the ATI site does not have an ATI video board
    in it and is not "registered" with ATI in any fashion. Yet I seem to have
    no trouble navigating the site.
    >
    >> Interesting enough it uses SSL, and will log you off after 10 minutes of
    >> inactivity.
    >
    > That, too, is a pain, and I hope they drop it. Try having more than one
    > window open on their sight. heh

    Works fine for me.
    >
    > Pagan

    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
  12. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    J wrote:

    >
    > "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
    > news:d143oc0m2d@news4.newsguy.com...
    >> J wrote:
    >>
    >> > Why did they go and change it again? Now you're only like 17 clicks
    > away
    >> > from finding your download--which contains 17 brand new bugs,
    >> > incidentally.
    >> > Something is definitety severely wrong with these morons. I'm shocked
    >> > they're smart enough to put out any sort of product at all...
    >>
    >> I count 5 clicks from the homepage to the Windows "open or save" box.
    > Where
    >> do you get "like 17"?
    >
    > I hope you're not serious! I got it from a dictionary...it's called
    > hyperbole.
    >
    > Anyway at first I couldn't even find any mention of a WindowsMe driver I
    > needed.

    What driver was this? "Windows ME" is right there 2/3 of the way down the
    driver page.

    > Until I noticed a "more..." which you have to click to get to the
    > full list for the category. That's so plainly idiotic I conclude that
    > they
    > or their web designer was on heroin at the time. The design they had
    > before
    > was really quite good and that model should have been kept. What made
    > them
    > go to huge dumb and cluttered bulleted text lists? Really quite stupid I
    > say.

    I see no "bulleted text lists". Perhaps you are using some nonstandard
    definition of "bullet"?

    > Also, once you tell it what system you have, it could list all the
    > available
    > downloads. Why do you have to go to 18 different pages to get drivers,
    > then
    > MMC, then, etc.? Not smart.

    More hyperbole? There's a page for the video driver and another for MMC.
    Two clicks. You remind of George Jetson complaining of his gruelling day
    at work at which he actually had to push the button.

    > This reminds me of Multimedia Center. That trashware changes each version
    > to suddenly include completely random new bugs for no apparent reason.

    So why do you upgrade it?

    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
  13. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
    news:d14lb5119q7@news1.newsguy.com...
    > J wrote:
    >
    > >
    > > "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
    > > news:d143oc0m2d@news4.newsguy.com...
    > >
    > > I hope you're not serious! I got it from a dictionary...it's called
    > > hyperbole.
    > >
    > > Anyway at first I couldn't even find any mention of a WindowsMe driver I
    > > needed.
    >
    > What driver was this? "Windows ME" is right there 2/3 of the way down the
    > driver page.

    See below.

    >
    > > Until I noticed a "more..." which you have to click to get to the
    > > full list for the category. That's so plainly idiotic I conclude that
    > > they
    > > or their web designer was on heroin at the time. The design they had
    > > before
    > > was really quite good and that model should have been kept. What made
    > > them
    > > go to huge dumb and cluttered bulleted text lists? Really quite stupid
    I
    > > say.
    >
    > I see no "bulleted text lists". Perhaps you are using some nonstandard
    > definition of "bullet"?

    Only the main list on the right side after clicking "drivers &
    software"--the one under the Knowledge Base heading. And in fact this is
    what I was using at first that led to the frustration. Click through the
    cluttered lists (or whatever they're called) and try to find AIW Radeon
    drivers for WinMe. You'll see the "more..." nonsense. It's all very
    clumsy.

    However using the navigation bar, or whatever, on the left, makes things
    much easier. I just ignored/didn't notice it at first. Still not
    particuarly logical IMO, but much better.

    > > Also, once you tell it what system you have, it could list all the
    > > available
    > > downloads. Why do you have to go to 18 different pages to get drivers,
    > > then
    > > MMC, then, etc.? Not smart.
    >
    > More hyperbole? There's a page for the video driver and another for MMC.
    > Two clicks. You remind of George Jetson complaining of his gruelling day
    > at work at which he actually had to push the button.

    Nope. To do the full install I needed Remote Wonder junk too. That's 3
    separate locations for files that should be all in one place. And it's far
    more than 3 clicks after all the going back and switching categories, etc.
    How many clicks would there have to be before you considered it a problem?
    And why should your arbitrary number be the acceptable one? You might have
    a higher tolerance for stupidity--fine; I'm only asking for best efficiency.

    > > This reminds me of Multimedia Center. That trashware changes each
    version
    > > to suddenly include completely random new bugs for no apparent reason.
    >
    > So why do you upgrade it?

    This is funny actually...I don't! Or rather I can't...at least not this
    version. I just tried to go to 9.06 today and no matter what I try, the TV
    app won't start. So back to 9.02 which still works for me. This is another
    whole story in itself though, this utter MMC mess. File player happened to
    work in 9.06 and the FF/RW volume bug is still there! That's part of the
    reason I was trying to upgrade. Explain that one, or let's just admit that
    that whoever's in charge is either really really dumb or extraordinarily
    clumsy.
  14. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    This thread is yet another perfect example our American education system
    going to hell.

    Some people simply do not know how to read. And some who do know how to
    read have zero comprehension skills.

    In ten more years we will be another third world nation. Trully Sad.
  15. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    J wrote:

    >
    > "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
    > news:d14lb5119q7@news1.newsguy.com...
    >> J wrote:
    >>
    >> >
    >> > "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
    >> > news:d143oc0m2d@news4.newsguy.com...
    >> >
    >> > I hope you're not serious! I got it from a dictionary...it's called
    >> > hyperbole.
    >> >
    >> > Anyway at first I couldn't even find any mention of a WindowsMe driver
    >> > I needed.
    >>
    >> What driver was this? "Windows ME" is right there 2/3 of the way down
    >> the driver page.
    >
    > See below.
    >
    >>
    >> > Until I noticed a "more..." which you have to click to get to the
    >> > full list for the category. That's so plainly idiotic I conclude that
    >> > they
    >> > or their web designer was on heroin at the time. The design they had
    >> > before
    >> > was really quite good and that model should have been kept. What made
    >> > them
    >> > go to huge dumb and cluttered bulleted text lists? Really quite stupid
    > I
    >> > say.
    >>
    >> I see no "bulleted text lists". Perhaps you are using some nonstandard
    >> definition of "bullet"?
    >
    > Only the main list on the right side after clicking "drivers &
    > software"--the one under the Knowledge Base heading. And in fact this is
    > what I was using at first that led to the frustration. Click through the
    > cluttered lists (or whatever they're called) and try to find AIW Radeon
    > drivers for WinMe. You'll see the "more..." nonsense. It's all very
    > clumsy.

    What I see is that below "Knowledge base" there are 11 lines, not counting
    blanks. The ninth is "Windows ME Drivers and Software". That's using
    Konqueror. The same using Mozilla. The same on Lynx. The same on IE.
    The same on Firefox. The same at 640x480. I see no "more...".

    > However using the navigation bar, or whatever, on the left, makes things
    > much easier. I just ignored/didn't notice it at first. Still not
    > particuarly logical IMO, but much better.
    >
    >> > Also, once you tell it what system you have, it could list all the
    >> > available
    >> > downloads. Why do you have to go to 18 different pages to get drivers,
    >> > then
    >> > MMC, then, etc.? Not smart.
    >>
    >> More hyperbole? There's a page for the video driver and another for MMC.
    >> Two clicks. You remind of George Jetson complaining of his gruelling day
    >> at work at which he actually had to push the button.
    >
    > Nope. To do the full install I needed Remote Wonder junk too. That's 3
    > separate locations for files that should be all in one place.

    Why should the Remote Wonder stuff be in the same place as the rest of the
    drivers? It's not specific to a video board, the Remote wonder is shipped
    with tuner boards as well.

    > And it's
    > far more than 3 clicks after all the going back and switching categories,
    > etc. How many clicks would there have to be before you considered it a
    > problem?
    > And why should your arbitrary number be the acceptable one? You might
    > have a higher tolerance for stupidity--fine; I'm only asking for best
    > efficiency.

    There's no "arbitrary number". I just don't find it burdensome to click a
    mouse button.

    >> > This reminds me of Multimedia Center. That trashware changes each
    > version
    >> > to suddenly include completely random new bugs for no apparent reason.
    >>
    >> So why do you upgrade it?
    >
    > This is funny actually...I don't! Or rather I can't...at least not this
    > version. I just tried to go to 9.06 today and no matter what I try, the
    > TV
    > app won't start. So back to 9.02 which still works for me. This is
    > another
    > whole story in itself though, this utter MMC mess. File player happened
    > to
    > work in 9.06 and the FF/RW volume bug is still there! That's part of the
    > reason I was trying to upgrade. Explain that one, or let's just admit
    > that that whoever's in charge is either really really dumb or
    > extraordinarily clumsy.

    Personally I use MCE.

    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
  16. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    I got the xp drivers in 2 clicks, typed ATI in google, clicked the top ATI
    link, then clicked 5.3 XP drivers on the left side of the page. You might
    want to count a 3rd click, to let windows download from the site. But
    that's not an ATI thing of course, it's an i.e. security setting...

    Mike

    "J" <speechee2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:28aZd.3620$N8.124353@news20.bellglobal.com...
    > Why did they go and change it again? Now you're only like 17 clicks away
    > from finding your download--which contains 17 brand new bugs,
    > incidentally.
    > Something is definitety severely wrong with these morons. I'm shocked
    > they're smart enough to put out any sort of product at all...
    >
    >
  17. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "J" <speechee2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:28aZd.3620$N8.124353@news20.bellglobal.com...
    > Why did they go and change it again? Now you're only like 17 clicks away
    > from finding your download--which contains 17 brand new bugs,
    > incidentally.
    > Something is definitety severely wrong with these morons. I'm shocked
    > they're smart enough to put out any sort of product at all...

    I get there in 5 clicks for XP or 6 for ME.

    1. At the site ATI.COM, click on the Drivers and Software button (the
    fourth gray button across the top)
    2. The Knowledge Base Screen will come up which lists the various OSes.
    Choose your OS.
    3. A list of Product types comes up (RADEON, All In Wonder, etc.) Click on
    the type of your graphics card.
    4. For ME, click more...
    5. Now you're at the screen that allows you to choose either the Catalyst
    drivers or MMC. Click on one of those two
    6. Choose if you want the CCC or the old Control Panel and there you go.

    Tom Lake
  18. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
    news:d15dub023qm@news2.newsguy.com...
    > J wrote:

    > > Only the main list on the right side after clicking "drivers &
    > > software"--the one under the Knowledge Base heading. And in fact this
    is
    > > what I was using at first that led to the frustration. Click through
    the
    > > cluttered lists (or whatever they're called) and try to find AIW Radeon
    > > drivers for WinMe. You'll see the "more..." nonsense. It's all very
    > > clumsy.
    >
    > What I see is that below "Knowledge base" there are 11 lines, not counting
    > blanks. The ninth is "Windows ME Drivers and Software". That's using
    > Konqueror. The same using Mozilla. The same on Lynx. The same on IE.
    > The same on Firefox. The same at 640x480. I see no "more...".

    This is pointless. Even if I re-explain, that the "more" thing comes later
    *as you click thru and try to find the drivers* (as I said), you'll just say
    it's not really that bad, or "well, you found it didn't you" or some such
    thing.

    > > Nope. To do the full install I needed Remote Wonder junk too. That's 3
    > > separate locations for files that should be all in one place.
    >
    > Why should the Remote Wonder stuff be in the same place as the rest of the
    > drivers? It's not specific to a video board, the Remote wonder is shipped
    > with tuner boards as well.

    Who cares? Once it knows my system (board/OS) I think it would be simpler
    and more efficient to list *all downloads for my system* on the same page.
    To answer your question then, re-read the previous sentence.

    I'm not sure what it is we're discussing here. Web design is subjective,
    but I'm only stating that I think improvments can be made. Do you assert
    that no improvements are possible? The fact that others have problems with
    this site, shows that this isn't the case. Unless you think that fewer
    people having trouble with it wouldn't represent an improvement! Obviously
    absurd. What is your standpoint then? Assuming little expense is required,
    should ATI make any improvments to the site? The only alternative would be
    to think the designers are so inept that any attempt would fail and only
    make things worse.
  19. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    J wrote:
    > Why did they go and change it again? Now you're only like 17 clicks
    > away from finding your download--which contains 17 brand new bugs,
    > incidentally. Something is definitety severely wrong with these
    > morons. I'm shocked they're smart enough to put out any sort of
    > product at all...

    well, somethings up with you.

    I typed ati.com into my address bar and on the left of the main page is the
    latest drivers, both the CCC and control panel versions. One click of the
    mouse and it was downloading.

    So I thought you must be talking about going through to the download area.
    Took 5 clicks from the main page to download the driver.

    Not too shabby really.
  20. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "cowboyz" <me@here.now> wrote in message
    news:d13moo$8hc$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
    >
    >
    > J wrote:
    > > Why did they go and change it again? Now you're only like 17 clicks
    > > away from finding your download--which contains 17 brand new bugs,
    > > incidentally. Something is definitety severely wrong with these
    > > morons. I'm shocked they're smart enough to put out any sort of
    > > product at all...
    >
    > well, somethings up with you.
    >
    > I typed ati.com into my address bar and on the left of the main page is
    the
    > latest drivers, both the CCC and control panel versions. One click of
    the
    > mouse and it was downloading.
    >
    > So I thought you must be talking about going through to the download area.
    > Took 5 clicks from the main page to download the driver.
    >
    > Not too shabby really.

    It's the site. On one computer, it only took a few clicks to get to the
    downloads. On another, it took many more, because for some reason I have to
    go through the old menus first before getting to the new ones. It was even
    more exciting getting the older drivers for the 8500dv, because you have to
    look very carefully to see there's yet another almost hidden menu,
    especially when your video drivers aren't loaded yet.

    The CCC is a mess, and the new CP version isn't much better. Lord help you
    if you choose large fonts.

    Pagan
  21. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    Pagan wrote:

    > "cowboyz" <me@here.now> wrote in message
    > news:d13moo$8hc$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
    >>
    >>
    >> J wrote:
    >> > Why did they go and change it again? Now you're only like 17 clicks
    >> > away from finding your download--which contains 17 brand new bugs,
    >> > incidentally. Something is definitety severely wrong with these
    >> > morons. I'm shocked they're smart enough to put out any sort of
    >> > product at all...
    >>
    >> well, somethings up with you.
    >>
    >> I typed ati.com into my address bar and on the left of the main page is
    > the
    >> latest drivers, both the CCC and control panel versions. One click of
    > the
    >> mouse and it was downloading.
    >>
    >> So I thought you must be talking about going through to the download
    >> area. Took 5 clicks from the main page to download the driver.
    >>
    >> Not too shabby really.
    >
    > It's the site. On one computer, it only took a few clicks to get to the
    > downloads. On another, it took many more, because for some reason I have
    > to
    > go through the old menus first before getting to the new ones.

    Then you should fix whatever has your browsing hosed up on that machine.
    Maybe flush the browser cache.

    > It was
    > even more exciting getting the older drivers for the 8500dv, because you
    > have to look very carefully to see there's yet another almost hidden menu,
    > especially when your video drivers aren't loaded yet.

    Hidden where? Under "previous drivers and software"? If you call that
    "hidden" you need new glasses.

    > The CCC is a mess, and the new CP version isn't much better. Lord help
    > you if you choose large fonts.
    >
    > Pagan

    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
  22. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
    news:d14lb6019qe@news1.newsguy.com...
    <snip>
    > The bottom line is that while the ATI site may not be up for any Web
    > excellence awards the criticisms I see are mere carping.

    Bitching common on newsgroups. It's a fine way to blow off steam.

    On the other hand, while not exactly rare, it's somewhat uncommon for a
    poster to run around telling everybody that they're wrong, and that what
    they see as difficult, tedious, and annoying is really exceedingly easy.

    So what is it, exactly, that you are hoping to accomplish with your posts?
    I'm certainly not trying to be offensive or imply somehow that you are doing
    something wrong, but I am curious as to why you feel the need to tell
    everybody, repeatedly, how easy it is for you to navigate ATI's site.

    Frankly, it's foolish to be critical of a user of a web site because they
    find it difficult to navigate. The whole point of the WWW is to make things
    easier to find, and until it was developed, most folks stayed away from the
    internet as well as BBS's due to the complexity and confusion of text based
    'surfing'. If a web site isn't easily used by the least experienced of
    users, the developer has failed in his job. The same applies when a web
    site is radically different from others of it's type. I've assembled half a
    dozen computers in the past week, and not one of the sites I downloaded
    drivers and applications from is even remotely similar to ATI's new site,
    nor did I have any trouble instantly finding what I need.

    The fact that at least four thousand other people in the past few days have
    the same issues shows that it's not a browser, vision, or IQ problem.

    Apparently, you don't agree, so I'm quite interested as to why.

    Pagan
  23. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    Pagan wrote:

    > "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
    > news:d14lb6019qe@news1.newsguy.com...
    > <snip>
    >> The bottom line is that while the ATI site may not be up for any Web
    >> excellence awards the criticisms I see are mere carping.
    >
    > Bitching common on newsgroups. It's a fine way to blow off steam.

    And so is bitching at the bitchers.

    > On the other hand, while not exactly rare, it's somewhat uncommon for a
    > poster to run around telling everybody that they're wrong, and that what
    > they see as difficult, tedious, and annoying is really exceedingly easy.

    I don't see how 5 clicks of the mouse is "difficult, tedious, and annoying"
    for even the most deeply rooted couch potato.

    > So what is it, exactly, that you are hoping to accomplish with your posts?

    I'm not "hoping to accomplish" _anything_.

    > I'm certainly not trying to be offensive or imply somehow that you are
    > doing something wrong, but I am curious as to why you feel the need to
    > tell everybody, repeatedly, how easy it is for you to navigate ATI's site.

    Because each poster has had a different complaint and when I checked it out
    I found that the behavior of the site was not as described.

    > Frankly, it's foolish to be critical of a user of a web site because they
    > find it difficult to navigate. The whole point of the WWW is to make
    > things easier to find, and until it was developed, most folks stayed away
    > from the internet as well as BBS's due to the complexity and confusion of
    > text based
    > 'surfing'. If a web site isn't easily used by the least experienced of
    > users, the developer has failed in his job.

    "The least experienced of users" shouldn't be upgrading video drivers
    without someone to hold their hand.

    > The same applies when a web
    > site is radically different from others of it's type. I've assembled half
    > a dozen computers in the past week, and not one of the sites I downloaded
    > drivers and applications from is even remotely similar to ATI's new site,
    > nor did I have any trouble instantly finding what I need.

    I don't consider a navigation frame to be a "radical difference".

    > The fact that at least four thousand other people in the past few days
    > have the same issues shows that it's not a browser, vision, or IQ problem.

    I notice that the choices given were "Is a total disaster id like the old
    one back please" and "I love it, I dont know what all the fuss is about".
    It would have been interesting to see how many hits they got on "I don't
    give a hoot in Hell, they both work fine for me".

    > Apparently, you don't agree, so I'm quite interested as to why.

    Because my observations are different from those of the people who are
    complaining.

    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
  24. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
    news:d153d701lvh@news4.newsguy.com...
    > Pagan wrote:

    > > Frankly, it's foolish to be critical of a user of a web site because
    they
    > > find it difficult to navigate. The whole point of the WWW is to make
    > > things easier to find, and until it was developed, most folks stayed
    away
    > > from the internet as well as BBS's due to the complexity and confusion
    of
    > > text based
    > > 'surfing'. If a web site isn't easily used by the least experienced of
    > > users, the developer has failed in his job.
    >
    > "The least experienced of users" shouldn't be upgrading video drivers
    > without someone to hold their hand.

    Unfair. Anyone should be able to upgrade video drivers. It's hardly very
    complex, although ATI stupidity--including the website itself,
    ironically--makes it harder than it should be. And it's not just drivers.
    Anyone should be able to update say Multimedia Center, which sometimes adds
    significant new features that anyone who has an AIW card would want. But at
    least you seem to concede that navigating the site requires hand-holding,
    which it shouldn't.
  25. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    J wrote:

    >
    > "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
    > news:d153d701lvh@news4.newsguy.com...
    >> Pagan wrote:
    >
    >> > Frankly, it's foolish to be critical of a user of a web site because
    > they
    >> > find it difficult to navigate. The whole point of the WWW is to make
    >> > things easier to find, and until it was developed, most folks stayed
    > away
    >> > from the internet as well as BBS's due to the complexity and confusion
    > of
    >> > text based
    >> > 'surfing'. If a web site isn't easily used by the least experienced of
    >> > users, the developer has failed in his job.
    >>
    >> "The least experienced of users" shouldn't be upgrading video drivers
    >> without someone to hold their hand.
    >
    > Unfair. Anyone should be able to upgrade video drivers. It's hardly very
    > complex, although ATI stupidity--including the website itself,
    > ironically--makes it harder than it should be.

    It's hardly very complex until you install the driver for a different board
    from the one that you have or leave out a piece or neglect to install the
    correct DirectX version or screw it up in any of the many ways that it can
    be screwed up.

    The "least experienced users" can barely turn on a computer and think that a
    3-1/2" diskette is a "hard disk" and that a CD drive is a "cupholder".
    Work tech support for a while and you'll realize that "the least
    experienced users" are not people who should be messing with the OS.

    > And it's not just drivers.
    > Anyone should be able to update say Multimedia Center, which sometimes
    > adds
    > significant new features that anyone who has an AIW card would want. But
    > at least you seem to concede that navigating the site requires
    > hand-holding, which it shouldn't.

    No, actually, I don't concede that at all. It requires that one be able to
    read the English language and know what kind of board one has and what the
    application that is used to provide the TV services etc is called, in other
    words it requires that one perform that horribly onerous task of R'ing TFM.

    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
  26. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
    news:d15dud123qn@news2.newsguy.com...
    > J wrote:
    > > Unfair. Anyone should be able to upgrade video drivers. It's hardly
    very
    > > complex, although ATI stupidity--including the website itself,
    > > ironically--makes it harder than it should be.
    >
    > It's hardly very complex until you install the driver for a different
    board
    > from the one that you have or leave out a piece or neglect to install the
    > correct DirectX version or screw it up in any of the many ways that it can
    > be screwed up.
    >
    > The "least experienced users" can barely turn on a computer and think that
    a
    > 3-1/2" diskette is a "hard disk" and that a CD drive is a "cupholder".
    > Work tech support for a while and you'll realize that "the least
    > experienced users" are not people who should be messing with the OS.

    You probably make some valid points here. But if your intention was to
    justify bad web design by saying "experts will figure it out and novices
    don't belong here anyway" then that's no justification. Why should anyone
    need to face clunky websites. Or perhaps you advocate bad web design to
    purposely repel novices. Please say no.
  27. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    Doesn't anyone see the winXP driver links on the left of the main page?

    Mike

    "Tom Lake" <tlake@twcny.rr.com> wrote in message
    news:o1oZd.137220$nC5.120677@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
    > "J" <speechee2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:28aZd.3620$N8.124353@news20.bellglobal.com...
    >> Why did they go and change it again? Now you're only like 17 clicks away
    >> from finding your download--which contains 17 brand new bugs,
    >> incidentally.
    >> Something is definitety severely wrong with these morons. I'm shocked
    >> they're smart enough to put out any sort of product at all...
    >
    > I get there in 5 clicks for XP or 6 for ME.
    >
    > 1. At the site ATI.COM, click on the Drivers and Software button (the
    > fourth gray button across the top)
    > 2. The Knowledge Base Screen will come up which lists the various OSes.
    > Choose your OS.
    > 3. A list of Product types comes up (RADEON, All In Wonder, etc.) Click
    > on the type of your graphics card.
    > 4. For ME, click more...
    > 5. Now you're at the screen that allows you to choose either the Catalyst
    > drivers or MMC. Click on one of those two
    > 6. Choose if you want the CCC or the old Control Panel and there you go.
    >
    > Tom Lake
    >
  28. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 23:15:40 GMT, "Mike" <mikepos1@yahoo.com> wrote:

    >Doesn't anyone see the winXP driver links on the left of the main page?
    >
    >Mike
    >

    Yeah.. One click and it started to download. Of course you have to
    have XP for that to work and not need some old driver or MMC..etc.

    Pluvious


    >"Tom Lake" <tlake@twcny.rr.com> wrote in message
    >news:o1oZd.137220$nC5.120677@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
    >> "J" <speechee2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    >> news:28aZd.3620$N8.124353@news20.bellglobal.com...
    >>> Why did they go and change it again? Now you're only like 17 clicks away
    >>> from finding your download--which contains 17 brand new bugs,
    >>> incidentally.
    >>> Something is definitety severely wrong with these morons. I'm shocked
    >>> they're smart enough to put out any sort of product at all...
    >>
    >> I get there in 5 clicks for XP or 6 for ME.
    >>
    >> 1. At the site ATI.COM, click on the Drivers and Software button (the
    >> fourth gray button across the top)
    >> 2. The Knowledge Base Screen will come up which lists the various OSes.
    >> Choose your OS.
    >> 3. A list of Product types comes up (RADEON, All In Wonder, etc.) Click
    >> on the type of your graphics card.
    >> 4. For ME, click more...
    >> 5. Now you're at the screen that allows you to choose either the Catalyst
    >> drivers or MMC. Click on one of those two
    >> 6. Choose if you want the CCC or the old Control Panel and there you go.
    >>
    >> Tom Lake
    >>
    >
  29. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "Gonzo" <r_murphree@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:FemZd.77795$SQ4.67324@fe1.texas.rr.com...
    > This thread is yet another perfect example our American education system
    > going to hell.
    >
    > Some people simply do not know how to read. And some who do know how to
    > read have zero comprehension skills.
    >
    > In ten more years we will be another third world nation. Trully Sad.
    >

    What do you mean in 10 years? Already, America has a 1500BC attitude to
    everyone else - that is, if I don't understand it or like it I'll beat it
    up.
  30. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "cowboyz" <me@here.now> wrote in message
    news:d17eee$1s4$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
    >
    > "Gonzo" <r_murphree@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:FemZd.77795$SQ4.67324@fe1.texas.rr.com...
    >> This thread is yet another perfect example our American education system
    >> going to hell.
    >>
    >> Some people simply do not know how to read. And some who do know how to
    >> read have zero comprehension skills.
    >>
    >> In ten more years we will be another third world nation. Trully Sad.
    >>
    >
    > What do you mean in 10 years? Already, America has a 1500BC attitude to
    > everyone else - that is, if I don't understand it or like it I'll beat it
    > up.

    That's not what I meant and you would be wise to refrain from the
    Anti-American postings here as it is not welcome.

    This is not a political newsgroup. Please take that political nonsense
    elsewhere.
  31. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    J wrote:
    > "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
    > news:d15dud123qn@news2.newsguy.com...
    >> J wrote:
    >>> Unfair. Anyone should be able to upgrade video drivers. It's
    >>> hardly very complex, although ATI stupidity--including the website
    >>> itself, ironically--makes it harder than it should be.
    >>
    >> It's hardly very complex until you install the driver for a
    >> different board from the one that you have or leave out a piece or
    >> neglect to install the correct DirectX version or screw it up in any
    >> of the many ways that it can be screwed up.
    >>
    >> The "least experienced users" can barely turn on a computer and
    >> think that a 3-1/2" diskette is a "hard disk" and that a CD drive is
    >> a "cupholder". Work tech support for a while and you'll realize that
    >> "the least experienced users" are not people who should be messing
    >> with the OS.
    >
    > You probably make some valid points here. But if your intention was
    > to justify bad web design by saying "experts will figure it out and
    > novices don't belong here anyway" then that's no justification. Why
    > should anyone need to face clunky websites. Or perhaps you advocate
    > bad web design to purposely repel novices. Please say no.

    You don't have to be an expert to install a driver. You don't have to be
    an expert to know what your hardware is. *Everyone* should know what their
    hardware is, weather they care or not is another story. I don't think
    Ati's website is a bad design. I don't think it is a good one either. I
    don't surf there. Once every six months or so I might decide to try a new
    driver and I grab it. I have never spent more than 2 seconds looking for a
    driver there.
  32. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    J. Clarke <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote:
    > Arthur Hagen wrote:
    >
    >
    >> As for using "font size=1",
    >
    > Where do they use this? I find no font size settings at all on the
    > site. Would you care to show me in the source where they set this?

    Sure thing, since you either don't appear to have a working grep, or don't
    know how to look at individual frames in framesets.

    Line 174 (migth vary due to being a dynamic page) of the main frameset you
    get to when you select "Drivers & Software" (<URL:
    https://support.ati.com/ics/support/default.asp?deptID=894&task=knowledge&folderID=27>)
    reads:

    <!-- READING FROM CACHE --><a class=contentLinks href=KBSplash.asp>ATI
    Customer Care</a><span class=contentLinks> > </span><a class=contentLinks
    href=KBList.asp?folderID=27>Drivers and Software</a><span
    class=contentLinks> > </span></p><span class=contentHead2>Drivers and
    Software</span><ol start=1><li class=contentBody><a class=contentLinks
    href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3358>Windows XP Drivers and
    Software</a><br><font size=1> </font><li class=contentBody><a
    class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3374>Windows 2000 Drivers
    and Software</a><br><font size=1> </font><li class=contentBody><a
    class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3376>Windows 98 Drivers and
    Software</a><br><font size=1> </font><li class=contentBody><a
    class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3380>Linux Drivers and
    Software</a><br><font size=1> </font><li class=contentBody><a
    class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3372>Windows XP Media Center
    Edition Drivers and Software</a><br><font size=1> </font><li
    class=contentBody><a class=contentLinks
    href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3314>Utilities</a><br><font
    size=1> </font><li class=contentBody><a class=contentLinks
    href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3373>Windows XP 64-Bit Edition Drivers and
    Software</a><br><font size=1> </font><li class=contentBody><a
    class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3375>Windows ME Drivers and
    Software</a><br><font size=1> </font><li class=contentBody><a
    class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3379>Mac OS Drivers and
    Software</a><br><font size=1> </font><li class=contentBody><a
    class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3378>Windows NT Drivers and
    Software</a><br><font size=1> </font></ol><p></p><img
    src=images/iBack.gif width=16 height=16 border=0 align=absmiddle
    alt=Back> <a class=contentLinks
    href="javascript:navBack();">Back</a></td></tr>

    > Comparing the ATI site with the nVidia, Matrox, IBM, Microsoft, and
    > AOL homepages, using Mozilla with the default settings, I find that
    > the text size on the ATI site is the _largest_.

    Not so when using Mozilla here.

    >> that's soo stupid I won't even go there. In 1920x1440 it's
    >> flyspeck, even if using large fonts.
    >
    >> Yes, users can override this, but should they have
    >> to, or know how to before they download the driver?
    >
    > If they don't know how to adjust font size on their browser and they
    > have it set to a small size that's going to affect more sites than
    > ATI.

    They don't have to have set anything -- using the *default* font sizes it's
    unreadable. Even if choosing "Large Fonts" in Windows.

    > If they can't read the ATI site then they aren't even going to
    > be able to _see_ the Matrox or nvidia sites.

    Wrong. None of those use font size=1.

    > And how are they
    > getting to 1920x1440 if they don't have a video driver loaded?

    Windows loads a default driver, or the shop they buy it from sets it up for
    them. Then they buy a game, it doesn't work, they call the hotline, and the
    hotline tells them to download new graphics card drivers.

    >> Revel in your own knowledge about this, and feel superiour to the new
    >> users
    >> who don't know all this yet.
    >
    > I find it interesting that you with all your experience are the one
    > who is having difficulties.

    I'm not having difficulties, but I have experience with user design and
    testing, and know a bit about what will cause problems for a typical
    non-technical user.

    >> I'm far from a new user, but I make software *for* new users.
    >
    > If you test it using only one browser and that hosed up then God help
    > them.

    I prefer to design following guidelines and let *non-developers* do testing
    on a great variety of platforms. Having the developer do the usability
    testing is really brain dead -- he should react to the usability test
    results.

    >> They have
    >> entirely different problems from what you or I may have, and perceive
    >> things
    >> quite differently. Unnecessary complexity and "works for me"
    >> attitudes are
    >> really really bad.
    >
    > So where would you "remove complexity" from the ATI site? Tell us
    > how.

    The front page is divided into at least a dozen different sections. That's
    way too much.
    When hitting "Drivers and Software" on the front page, you get a
    "navigation" frame on the left that for practical purposes mirrors the frame
    on the right. That's a huge waste, and is also confusing.
    Then there's the subtabs. Tabs are OK. Subtabs are not, especially not
    when they don't follow your navigation. You click "Drivers & Software", so
    why should there be subtabs for "Customer Care Home", "online Support",
    Request Support" and "My Support"? That's not sub-functions of Drivers &
    Software. Neither is "Knowledge Base" and "Troubleshooter", which are
    sub-sub-tabs. It's topsy-turvy, and doesn't make sense unless you read from
    the bottom up.
    Then there's the little arrows next to text, which look clickable. They're
    not. The text is, though, although it doesn't stand out in any way. Except
    inside imagemaps, where the arrow *is* clickable.
    And if you figure out that the text is clickable, then you may end up in
    trouble too. Fill in the search form and hit "Search" next to, and it
    discards your search - you have to hit the "GO" button instead. That's
    breaking with your own design, and making things complicated when you don't
    have to.
    Then there's the rollover menus that you have to pass to get from A to B on
    the front page. That's not pretty, and can make life hard for a
    non-technical user by being too complex. Say the user has clicked in the
    standard browser URL field and entered www.ati.com. Then the page appears,
    and he sees "Investors", and moves the mouse down to click on it. If he's
    not watching crefully, he'll end up at "Find a driver" from the Customer
    Care submenu instead, because it pops up and overwrites the Investors link.
    If he *is* careful, but not very technical, he might move the mouse up and
    down, up and down, up and down until he figures out he has to move the mouse
    sideways out of the pulldown menu to get it to disappear. The pulldown menu
    here adds complexity, and makes it more difficult to use links on the site,
    something I'm sure wasn't the intent.

    There's plenty of other examples, which you should be able to find yourself,
    if you take off your Ruby coloured glasses.

    --
    *Art


    >
    >> While some users are smart, and most are just smart or
    >> adventurous enough, not all of them think like a geek, and need some
    >> hand holding and simplicity. Here, ATI fails.
    >
    > Here every site fails. Including yours no doubt. There is always
    > someone to whom the thought patterns used by the site designer are
    > foreign.
    >
    > I don't see how much clearer you can get than "Drivers &
    > Software/Windows XP/Radeon". Perhaps they should change "Driver
    > download" to "click this first"?
  33. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "Gonzo" <r_murphree@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:O%IZd.1397$nW3.315@tornado.texas.rr.com...
    > "cowboyz" <me@here.now> wrote in message
    > news:d17eee$1s4$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
    >>
    >> "Gonzo" <r_murphree@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    >> news:FemZd.77795$SQ4.67324@fe1.texas.rr.com...
    >>> This thread is yet another perfect example our American education system
    >>> going to hell.
    >>>
    >>> Some people simply do not know how to read. And some who do know how to
    >>> read have zero comprehension skills.
    >>>
    >>> In ten more years we will be another third world nation. Trully Sad.
    >>>
    >>
    >> What do you mean in 10 years? Already, America has a 1500BC attitude to
    >> everyone else - that is, if I don't understand it or like it I'll beat it
    >> up.
    >
    > That's not what I meant and you would be wise to refrain from the
    > Anti-American postings here as it is not welcome.
    >

    Yes I really wish posters would be more specific, as "America" covers two
    continents and a number of countries.
  34. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    > You remind of George Jetson complaining of his gruelling day
    >at work at which he actually had to push the button.

    Hey, it wasn't that he had to push the button,,,,he had to push it
    FIVE TIMES in one day. I know, I remember that episode......

    BTW, I'm a State Worker, so I can sympathise with George...; p

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    You should start drinking prune juice and KY jelly cocktails right now,
    that will make things a lot smoother.
    -Felatio Love
  35. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    Arthur Hagen wrote:

    > J. Clarke <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote:
    >> Arthur Hagen wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> As for using "font size=1",
    >>
    >> Where do they use this? I find no font size settings at all on the
    >> site. Would you care to show me in the source where they set this?
    >
    > Sure thing, since you either don't appear to have a working grep, or don't
    > know how to look at individual frames in framesets.
    >
    > Line 174 (migth vary due to being a dynamic page) of the main frameset you
    > get to when you select "Drivers & Software" (<URL:
    >
    https://support.ati.com/ics/support/default.asp?deptID=894&task=knowledge&folderID=27>)
    > reads:
    >
    > <!-- READING FROM CACHE --><a class=contentLinks href=KBSplash.asp>ATI
    > Customer Care</a><span class=contentLinks> > </span><a class=contentLinks
    > href=KBList.asp?folderID=27>Drivers and Software</a><span
    > class=contentLinks> > </span></p><span class=contentHead2>Drivers and
    > Software</span><ol start=1><li class=contentBody><a class=contentLinks
    > href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3358>Windows XP Drivers and
    > Software</a><br><font size=1> </font><li class=contentBody><a
    > class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3374>Windows 2000 Drivers
    > and Software</a><br><font size=1> </font><li class=contentBody><a
    > class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3376>Windows 98 Drivers
    > and Software</a><br><font size=1> </font><li class=contentBody><a
    > class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3380>Linux Drivers and
    > Software</a><br><font size=1> </font><li class=contentBody><a
    > class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3372>Windows XP Media
    > Center Edition Drivers and Software</a><br><font size=1> </font><li
    > class=contentBody><a class=contentLinks
    > href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3314>Utilities</a><br><font
    > size=1> </font><li class=contentBody><a class=contentLinks
    > href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3373>Windows XP 64-Bit Edition Drivers and
    > Software</a><br><font size=1> </font><li class=contentBody><a
    > class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3375>Windows ME Drivers
    > and Software</a><br><font size=1> </font><li class=contentBody><a
    > class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3379>Mac OS Drivers and
    > Software</a><br><font size=1> </font><li class=contentBody><a
    > class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3378>Windows NT Drivers
    > and Software</a><br><font size=1> </font></ol><p></p><img
    > src=images/iBack.gif width=16 height=16 border=0 align=absmiddle
    > alt=Back> <a class=contentLinks
    > href="javascript:navBack();">Back</a></td></tr>

    I see. So they made a bunch of nonbreaking spaces font size 1. Now where
    did they make some actual _text_ that size?

    >> Comparing the ATI site with the nVidia, Matrox, IBM, Microsoft, and
    >> AOL homepages, using Mozilla with the default settings, I find that
    >> the text size on the ATI site is the _largest_.
    >
    > Not so when using Mozilla here.

    Then try it with the default settings instead of whatever hosed up settings
    you're using.

    >>> that's soo stupid I won't even go there. In 1920x1440 it's
    >>> flyspeck, even if using large fonts.
    >>
    >>> Yes, users can override this, but should they have
    >>> to, or know how to before they download the driver?
    >>
    >> If they don't know how to adjust font size on their browser and they
    >> have it set to a small size that's going to affect more sites than
    >> ATI.
    >
    > They don't have to have set anything -- using the *default* font sizes
    > it's
    > unreadable. Even if choosing "Large Fonts" in Windows.

    Default font sizes in what? If their site is "unreadable" then the Matrox
    and nVidia sites are _invisible_.

    >> If they can't read the ATI site then they aren't even going to
    >> be able to _see_ the Matrox or nvidia sites.
    >
    > Wrong. None of those use font size=1.

    I don't care what font size they use, the fonts that appear on the screen,
    when compared side by side, are larger on the ATI site than on either of
    the others.

    >> And how are they
    >> getting to 1920x1440 if they don't have a video driver loaded?
    >
    > Windows loads a default driver,

    Which goes to 1920x1440?

    > or the shop they buy it from sets it up
    > for
    > them.

    So why do they need a driver?

    > Then they buy a game, it doesn't work, they call the hotline, and
    > the hotline tells them to download new graphics card drivers.

    The game isn't going to work at 1920x1440 either.

    >>> Revel in your own knowledge about this, and feel superiour to the new
    >>> users
    >>> who don't know all this yet.
    >>
    >> I find it interesting that you with all your experience are the one
    >> who is having difficulties.
    >
    > I'm not having difficulties, but I have experience with user design and
    > testing, and know a bit about what will cause problems for a typical
    > non-technical user.
    >
    >>> I'm far from a new user, but I make software *for* new users.
    >>
    >> If you test it using only one browser and that hosed up then God help
    >> them.
    >
    > I prefer to design following guidelines and let *non-developers* do
    > testing
    > on a great variety of platforms. Having the developer do the usability
    > testing is really brain dead -- he should react to the usability test
    > results.

    In other words you don't have a clue how your software really looks on real
    world browsers other than your one hosed up copy of Mozilla.

    Talk about arrogance . . .

    >>> They have
    >>> entirely different problems from what you or I may have, and perceive
    >>> things
    >>> quite differently. Unnecessary complexity and "works for me"
    >>> attitudes are
    >>> really really bad.
    >>
    >> So where would you "remove complexity" from the ATI site? Tell us
    >> how.
    >
    > The front page is divided into at least a dozen different sections.
    > That's way too much.

    ??? How does this affect the user? Or are you suggesting that the average
    web browser can't display those sections properly?

    > When hitting "Drivers and Software" on the front page, you get a
    > "navigation" frame on the left that for practical purposes mirrors the
    > frame
    > on the right. That's a huge waste, and is also confusing.

    Perhaps. It's also redundancy.

    > Then there's the subtabs. Tabs are OK. Subtabs are not, especially not
    > when they don't follow your navigation. You click "Drivers & Software",
    > so why should there be subtabs for "Customer Care Home", "online Support",
    > Request Support" and "My Support"? That's not sub-functions of Drivers &
    > Software. Neither is "Knowledge Base" and "Troubleshooter", which are
    > sub-sub-tabs. It's topsy-turvy, and doesn't make sense unless you read
    > from the bottom up.

    I've not encountered any problem there. The default goes straight to the
    drivers. Perhaps they should have another "support" tab, but that might be
    equally confusing.

    > Then there's the little arrows next to text, which look clickable.
    > They're
    > not.

    The only "little arrow" I see is next to "back".

    > The text is, though, although it doesn't stand out in any way.
    > Except inside imagemaps, where the arrow *is* clickable.
    > And if you figure out that the text is clickable, then you may end up in
    > trouble too. Fill in the search form and hit "Search" next to, and it
    > discards your search - you have to hit the "GO" button instead.

    I don't see any "search", just "advanced search". Now it should carry over
    the terms I agree.

    > That's
    > breaking with your own design, and making things complicated when you
    > don't have to.
    > Then there's the rollover menus that you have to pass to get from A to B
    > on
    > the front page.

    "A to B on the front page"? You've lost me.

    > That's not pretty, and can make life hard for a
    > non-technical user by being too complex. Say the user has clicked in the
    > standard browser URL field and entered www.ati.com. Then the page
    > appears,
    > and he sees "Investors", and moves the mouse down to click on it. If he's
    > not watching crefully, he'll end up at "Find a driver" from the Customer
    > Care submenu instead, because it pops up and overwrites the Investors
    > link.

    That seems to be a problem only with Internet Explorer--it doesn't occur
    with Mozilla or Konqueror.

    > If he *is* careful, but not very technical, he might move the mouse
    > up and down, up and down, up and down until he figures out he has to move
    > the mouse
    > sideways out of the pulldown menu to get it to disappear. The pulldown
    > menu here adds complexity, and makes it more difficult to use links on the
    > site, something I'm sure wasn't the intent.

    Might be better to put the secondary links at the bottom, but still finding
    "investors" is hardly an emergency.

    > There's plenty of other examples, which you should be able to find
    > yourself, if you take off your Ruby coloured glasses.

    They're hardly "ruby colored". I just seem to have a higher standard for
    disaster than you do. For me "disaster" is things like your house burning
    down or being diagnosed with cancer. A less than ideally perfect Web site
    ranks somewhere below a cat scratch.

    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
  36. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
    news:d1478p0pf3@news4.newsguy.com...
    >
    >
    <snip>
    >
    > Now let's see, on the ATI site you need to know your OS, your video board,
    > and whether you want MMC. Doesn't seem that hard to me.
    >>
    >> Regards,
    >
    > --
    > --John
    > to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    > (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

    I think the problem is not that negotiating the web site is "that hard" to
    anyone but that it could be much, much better through a few simple changes -
    and that's annoying. For one thing, the part where the MMC 9.06 download
    mentions its only for 9xxx series cards and newer and that users of previous
    cards should download 9.02 has no link to 9.02. Users need to realise that
    they need to move to the left frame and start navigating through that (up
    until this point they hadn't needed to touch that left frame menu). Pagan
    was right earlier on in the thread in that obtaining software for an 8500DV
    is needlessly complex and that's not an observation about me but about the
    website. I would send an email to the webmaster about it but.... you guessed
    it, I cant find a suitable email address and nor can I find an appropriate
    webform - wait, after about a minute or two going all around the place on
    their website I finally found this page:
    http://apps.ati.com/webmaster/webfeedback.html through the small grey font
    "about this site" link in the small print at the bottom of the home page.
    You'd think it would be under the "contacts" page but no such luck. Anyway
    my feedback has just been sent to the webmaster using this method, I hope
    others do the same and it may be improved as a consequence.

    Paul
  37. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "Gonzo" <r_murphree@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:FemZd.77795$SQ4.67324@fe1.texas.rr.com...
    <snip>
    >
    > In ten more years we will be another third world nation. Trully Sad.
    And George W Bush will be leading the country in that direction - starting
    today!

    Paul
  38. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "Paul Murphy" <p_murphynothanks@tospamhotmail.com> wrote in
    news:4238c766$0$571$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net:

    > "Gonzo" <r_murphree@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:FemZd.77795$SQ4.67324@fe1.texas.rr.com...
    > <snip>
    >>
    >> In ten more years we will be another third world nation. Trully Sad.
    > And George W Bush will be leading the country in that direction -
    > starting today!


    relax! oil-drilling in the alaskan wildlife refuge was passed today, soon
    we'll all be RICH BEEYATCH
  39. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
    news:d1c4d60jfm@news3.newsguy.com...
    > Arthur Hagen wrote:
    >
    >> J. Clarke <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote:
    >>>
    <snip - long tit-for-tat deleted>
    >
    >> Come to think of it, that was the straw -- your pointless trolling just
    >> to
    >> keep a "conversation" going has now become so silly that I'm withdrawing.
    >> *plonk*
    >
    > Fascinating. Simply fascinating.
    >
    > I used to think you were a pretty sharp guy.
    >
    > --
    > --John
    > to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    > (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

    In case my earlier post was unnoticed, feedback on the website (both
    positive and negative) can be directly reported to ATI from here:
    http://apps.ati.com/webmaster/webfeedback.html if people want to make a
    difference, then this would be the best avenue to do so.

    Paul
Ask a new question

Read More

Radeon Download Bug ATI Graphics