B3D history
- Thread starter _xxx_
- Start date
He still posts here from time to time. Keep an eye out for the username "Dave".
Not quite OT but this threa dmade me do some searching.
I know there are some problems with the transfers to the current B3D backend (from the previous one) but I'd like to highlight the facts that I acn't find :
1) Kristof's T-Buffer/SSAA-explained article, arguably the ONE article that made a certain set of folks sit up and take notice of B3D;
2) a (pseudo-) interview I had with JC that included Humus' ATi tweak
FYI. TBH I don't know what else are missing within all the main reviews/articles/interviews pages due to the switch. I personally think this is an important issue. Just MHO.
I know there are some problems with the transfers to the current B3D backend (from the previous one) but I'd like to highlight the facts that I acn't find :
1) Kristof's T-Buffer/SSAA-explained article, arguably the ONE article that made a certain set of folks sit up and take notice of B3D;
2) a (pseudo-) interview I had with JC that included Humus' ATi tweak
FYI. TBH I don't know what else are missing within all the main reviews/articles/interviews pages due to the switch. I personally think this is an important issue. Just MHO.
Dimension3D was really just a forum I was "highly"active in, website (outdated and with known bugs) I came from was this (I am surprised its still online since I stopped paying for this ages ago, be it under a nasty URL):
http://www.ping.be/~pin10741/Articles.htm
I then joined Beyond3D for quite a while becoming a little bit less PowerVR-centric, moved to more of a technical advisor role when I joined Imagination Technologies and finally moved out due to workload (24/7 of 3D is a bit too much, even for me).
Now I am mainly lurking in the background on the forums
K-
Well, there's no "problem". They just have to be ported manually, page by page by page by etc. This includes copy/paste, and where images are involved, save/transfer/relink. All of the interviews that were in the old site's DB are done. On articles, most of the popular ones are done, and some portion of the older ones, with more getting done every week.
The dates shown in the current DB give at least a hint where the progress is on that, but not entirely. It turns out that the dates in the index pages of the old site were often inaccurate. The date on the article itself was more accurate, so that's the one we've gone with in the new DB. But since we're using the old index oldest-first to do ports on articles, correcting the dates as we go gives a bit of an inaccurate indication. For instance, it looks like we're into 2001 and therefore someone might think that we'd done all the 2000 articles we're going to do. That's not true, however, as those 20001 articles shown are actually re-dated articles that were marked with earlier dates in the old index (but not on the article themself).
So, what's the status on the T-buffer article? Well, it's marked in the old DB index as being from Dec 2000, and we haven't quite got there yet as we move up that index. On the other hand, when I look at the article itself, it says the 3 constituent parts are from Dec 1999. So when we do get there in the next week or so they'll actually slot further down the current list.
I have no idea why so many dates are wrong in the old index. I asked Wavey and he muttered something about Marco and the previous port from two backends ago. . .
Similar threads
