What's with my video card!!

"Joseph Curtin" wrote in message
...


My only interest in using the old Rage Pro Card is that it has the audio and
video outputs which I can connect to my TV set. The built-in video on the
new system has no video out capability.

Joe from Massachusetts
(AKA Slow from Massachusetts)

* Joseph Curtin:

I have been running an ATI All-in-Wonder Rage Pro 128 on antique Asus
motherboard, 256kRam, 233Mhz, with Win98 ever since Clinton was President
(or was it Bush the First?).
I use the video output to view streaming video or to view saved video files
on my large-screen TV set, downloaded from Italian television, since I spent
a long time in Italy, and there are thousands of programs archived on the
Italian national TV site, RAI.
http://www.rai.tv/dl/RaiTV/da_rivedere.html
If I try to watch the files streaming, my old system is too slow, and I get
a jerky video. But if I save the desired wmv files, using Windows Media
Recorder, and disable all unnecessary drivers, I am able to view the files
with good results on this old system.
Now I have inherited a Compaq Presario SR2020NX desktop, which has built-in
Nvidia NVIDIA GeForce 6150 LE Graphics.
I have a dual-boot system on the old Win 98 system, and occasionally boot
into XP for selected operations (very slow operations, to say the least),
but the video works fine in XP.
My question is whether the old Rage Pro 128 would work on this new system?
Would the antique Rage Pro 128 work under XP on this new system? Could I
just install the Ati card as a secondary monitor?

You know that it is considered very rude to "hijack" a thread? You
should have opened a new thread for this as it has nothing to do with
the OP's problem.

Benjamin

* Joseph Curtin:

I have been running an ATI All-in-Wonder Rage Pro 128 on antique Asus
motherboard, 256kRam, 233Mhz, with Win98 ever since Clinton was President
(or was it Bush the First?).

Well, the Rage 128 was much better than the old Rage II/Pro GPUs.

I use the video output to view streaming video or to view saved video files
on my large-screen TV set, downloaded from Italian television, since I spent
a long time in Italy, and there are thousands of programs archived on the
Italian national TV site, RAI.
http://www.rai.tv/dl/RaiTV/da_rivedere.html
If I try to watch the files streaming, my old system is too slow, and I get
a jerky video. But if I save the desired wmv files, using Windows Media
Recorder, and disable all unnecessary drivers, I am able to view the files
with good results on this old system.

Sounds like a network bandwidth issue.

Now I have inherited a Compaq Presario SR2020NX desktop, which has built-in
Nvidia NVIDIA GeForce 6150 LE Graphics.
I have a dual-boot system on the old Win 98 system, and occasionally boot
into XP for selected operations (very slow operations, to say the least),
but the video works fine in XP.
My question is whether the old Rage Pro 128 would work on this new system?

No because the Rage 128 was an AGP card and your new computer should
have PCI Express.

Would the antique Rage Pro 128 work under XP on this new system? Could I
just install the Ati card as a secondary monitor?
I guess I could just stick it in there and see what flies, but I would
rather have another input before I start fooling around.

Really, with much newer graphics cards available for a few bucks or even
for free, I really wonder why you waste time with such old crap. The
Rage128 is over 10 years old, you should understand that even if the
card itself is working there is only a limited useful life for such
components, and for the ATI Rage series this time has long ran out. Get
over it.

Benjamin

On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 19:47:03 +0000, Benjamin Gawert
wrote:

* mm:

I can tell you that the signal that comes out after 100ft of cable will
look like crap. As with most analogue signals, neither CVBS nor Y/C get
any better when pushed over long cables. I wouldn't go over 10ft to
avoid degrading the usually already poor image quality that comes out of
most TV out ports

Well, what might I do to get past this obstacle? The DVDR is almost
100 feet from the computer. If I run the cable straight down the
hall, in front of three doorways and a stairway, it's only 50 feet,
but that won't look very nice.

There is not much you can do. 50ft is still way too much to avoid the
signal look like crap.

Something about your posting style made me feel I should check on this
somewhere else.

You can use one of the wireless video
transmitters to avoid the cable, however the resulting image quality
usually looks like crap as well.

The only way to avoid that is to bring DVDR and TV closer together.

This appears not to be so. Someone else tells me he often does what I
want to do He uses a pair of transformets "S-Video with Stereo Audio
Baluns" to send sound and picture over a non-shielded twisted-pair,
using a 100 foot long CAT-5 Ethernet cable. This product is designed
to do exactly what I want, and he says it does it very well.

He recommends the ETS PV902, which he says has excellent performance:
http://www.etslan.com/AudioVideo.htm

Cheaper and easier to get is from svideo.com. He says he hasn't used
it, but figures it works as well as the other.
http://www.svideo.com/svaudiobalun17.html

This url says it is good for 1000 feet, not just 100 like I need.

Someone else also tells me that for video and audio, 100 ft or even
more is not terribly far.


Benjamin

* mm:

There is not much you can do. 50ft is still way too much to avoid the
signal look like crap.

Something about your posting style made me feel I should check on this
somewhere else.

If you think that the law of physics change if you just ask somewhere
else, go ahead.

This appears not to be so. Someone else tells me he often does what I
want to do He uses a pair of transformets "S-Video with Stereo Audio
Baluns" to send sound and picture over a non-shielded twisted-pair,
using a 100 foot long CAT-5 Ethernet cable. This product is designed
to do exactly what I want, and he says it does it very well.

He recommends the ETS PV902, which he says has excellent performance:
http://www.etslan.com/AudioVideo.htm

Cheaper and easier to get is from svideo.com. He says he hasn't used
it, but figures it works as well as the other.
http://www.svideo.com/svaudiobalun17.html

This url says it is good for 1000 feet, not just 100 like I need.

Sure, because these are digital converters that convert your analoge
signal in a digital one, and digital signals are easier to transmit over
long distances because it is less prone to interference.

However, it still doesn't change the fact that using 100ft of S-Video
cable (which is what you originally intended, not using converters) does
look like crap.

Someone else also tells me that for video and audio, 100 ft or even
more is not terribly far.

If you use those converters where especially the good ones are not cheap
then yes. However, for your original idea (just using a longer cable)
this is BS.

Benjamin