Neowin.net

Thanks to our friends over at t-break for this!

SiS330 Overview:

SiS 330, with high performance and promised graphic solution, demonstrates the first GPU to support AGP8X and DirectX 8.1 among the mainstream competitors. Moreover, its embedded ”Pixelizer Engine” will generate the maximum output when operating application software. The outstanding features SiS330 provide would shake the mainstream market and push SiS to the leading position.

Power GPU to support AGP8x
- AGP 3.0 compliant

SiS “Pixelizer” Engine
- SiS H/W Pixel Shader

DirectX8.1 Compliant
-Supports Volume Texture, Bump Mapping, Cubic Mapping, BRDF, Shadow Mapping.

High Quality Video Processor
-Supports de-interlaced function for video sources from MPEG decoder
- Hyper FSAA (full scene anti-aliasing)

Display Memory Interface
- Up to 128MB SDR/DDR Memory

Multimedia Solution (using SiS301 series)
- Dual Display - Convenient Solution for Dual-monitor
- 3D Wizard – 3D visual function

News source: t-break

"We have strong relationships with many of the state attorneys general," said Microsoft spokesman Jim Desler. "We work with them on various activities and initiatives. On this issue, we agree to disagree. While the states do have a role in antitrust enforcement, the non-settling states stepped outside the boundaries of that role when they chose to pursue a different course from the Justice Department, resulting in conflicting national competition policy."

In making the filing, the states are trying to protect their sovereignty over antitrust matters, something a dismissal could potentially undermine, said legal experts.

"There are a lot of us who, having done antitrust defense, would like to see this whole dual-sovereignty issue resolved," said Emmett Stanton, an antitrust lawyer with Fenwick & West in Palo Alto, Calif. "If there was a case to challenge this, this would be the one."

The "friends of court" briefs filed by the 25 states were not expected, but a third brief from the litigating states came as no surprise. The states rebutted Microsoft's request more in the context of the overall antitrust case than in regard to the sovereignty issue.

They argued that Microsoft's request is "effectively, a motion to set aside the Court of Appeals' mandate."

In June 2000, seven judges unanimously upheld eight separate antitrust violations against Microsoft.

The filings could give the litigating states important air cover as they return to court next week for what could be as much as eight weeks of testimony. They are looking for stiffer sanctions than those proposed by the Justice Department and the settling states. The settlement largely puts restrictions on Microsoft's business practices. The litigating states also want restrictions on how Microsoft develops and deploys software.

While overseeing the settlement proceeding, Kollar-Kotelly must weigh whether the settlement meets the standard demanded by the Nixon-era Tunney Act. That law requires that a settlement be in the public interest and that no backroom dealmaking influence the process. Kollar-Kotelly could reject or approve the proposed deal at any time.