I can't see why ATI would take so long to develop a card that doesn't beat their rival and take the performance crown, unless they simply couldn't.
Well we don't know that, we haven't seen the XTX, so whether they could or couldn't is questionable, that they decided not to initially is obvious, but that was the same with the X1800XL launch, and then shortly after the X1800XT outpaced it. So who is this scenario different? If they took another month to launch the XTX it would be the same timeline, so drawing conclusions now would just be as weak as those who said the exact same thing last time.
This way Nvidia don't have to drop their price and ATI lose in my opinion the most significant market sector, the top end.
It's far from the most significant market sector, that's the midrange $100-250 sector, and that's a shambles right now. There is PR value in the high end butit's still rather limited, because only a few people know the top performing cards, and those do enough research to figure out what's best. You wanna talk PR, then 3Dmark is equally valuable, and it seems one of the few things the HD2900 does well out of the box is 3Dmark. So by your reasoning those printed THG barcharts and such at BestBuy and FutureShop for the Sheep to read, would currently favour the AMD solution, even if thos of us smart enough to do research would know that Bunghoiomarks don't tell the whole story... by far.
I have been buying ATI cards for quite a while as their card was the most powerful at the time when i came to upgrade. I actually waited for the R600 to come out and did not buy an 8800 GTX becuase of this. Now I am gutted and wished I had becuase I have missed out on months of better quality gaming and I bet there are many people out there in the same position.
While I understand the sentiment, remember alot of us, including me, said get the GTX when it came out, or get the eVGA GTS and give upgrade options, and when the GTS-320 was selling so low, once again, good time to buy. While I understand your dissapointment, I would over-react by painting the entire scenario black, because while it's not rosey red, it's not terrible, and there's obvious improvement points for the R600 to take into the R650 design. So it's far from a final step. It just sucks to anticipate something better and being let down, to me that was like Spiderman3.
Nvidia have had their 8800 GTX card out for months, I think we can safely say they haven't been twiddling their thumbs.
No company does, but like the HD2900 launch proved, and the GF7900 launch proved, despite having the time to make another product, it doesn't mean your next one will be significantly better than the other guy's next product. If the GF7800-7900 vs X1800-1900 launches showed us anything, they don't have to twiddle their tumbs to come up short, and both companies have experienced that (just look at the X1650Pro)
If the 2900 XT was not due to compete with the 8800 GTX where is the card that was? I have not heard about the XTX but do they expect people to wait even longer? I am not.
If you haven't heard about the XTX then you haven't been researching all that much. There's still as little solid evidence about the XTX as there was about the XT prior to it's launch. Lotsa rumour, but little colid info.
However, that it's eventually launch and arrival may be in question, it's existanceisn't as there have been many engineering samples out there with the higher clocked bios and GDDR4 memory, so it's not questionable that there was another card meant to compete with the GTX, that it would or will be effective is another story.