Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD Dropping R300-R500 Support In Catalyst Driver

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I totally agree!

    Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
    Fedora isn't a distro for endusers! Fedora is the DEV platform for RedHat Server OS!

    Its Like Debian SID/sidux SID is not a Distro for endusers!

    USE stable Distris Like Debian 5 or use CentOS or Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)

    STOP Talking abaut the Crap Fedora!

    Thank you, and this needs to get out to everyone. I'm so sick of seeing articles comparing Dev distros with SUPPORTED distros.

    Comment


    • I think the confusing thing about Fedora is that it is different things at different points in the RHEL development cycle. Sometimes it's a bleeding edge test platform running three months ahead of upstream; other times it's a real nice distro with the newest features decently integrated and fixed up. AFAIK you have to talk about specific Fedora releases, not Fedora in general.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by homerhomer View Post
        Thank you, and this needs to get out to everyone. I'm so sick of seeing articles comparing Dev distros with SUPPORTED distros.
        Eh? As far as I know nobody ships XFree86 anymore (thank God) so everybody's running Xorg and the big difference between stable and development heads of distros is the package version, nothing more.

        For example, CentOS is neither development nor supported; it's stable in versioning but not actually part of the development downstream.

        Comment


        • I don't use fglrx for my Radeon 9550 but I've found that I have to install it, if only briefly, to get any acceleration with any WINE-based products.

          Once I've installed fglrx, I can then remove it and go back to the xorg-video-ati driver, retaining acceleration in WINE/Cedega but if I can't even install it, come Ubuntu 9.04, the usefulness of my PC is going to be severely hampered.

          Anyone else experienced this bug and know a way around it that doesn't involve installing and uninstalling fglrx?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by energyman View Post
            you know - people like you are pretty useless for the linux ecosystem ...
            Why has everybody to be useful for the "linux ecosystem"? I'm a user, not a developer. I provide bug reports and other feedback to the projects I care about. Sometimes, I even donate money.

            But a driver is something the company that built the hardware *has* to provide. ATI claimed they support Linux (that's why I considered a laptop with ATI graphics in the first place), so I took them at their word. And they've let me down for five long years. If it was possible to switch my graphic card, I would have done that three or four years ago, because even then I was already sick of it.

            As I said before, I won't need another driver from ATI. You know, a pleased customer buys more. So does an unpleased one, but from the competition. So if you want to call that "whining" - please, do so. Call your customers whiners as loud and as public as possible so that other people also learn what ATI thinks of them and how little it cares about long-term company-customers-relationship.

            It's this kind of short-sightedness that kills companies.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Stormking View Post
              It's this kind of short-sightedness that kills companies.
              Can you really call actively supporting the development of FOSS drivers (releasing docs, paying someone to work on the code) is really "short-sightedness"? I'd call it long-sightedness, if anything. The very thing which is so hard to find today in for-profit companies.

              I think you're missing the bigger picture a bit, to be honest.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by susikala View Post
                Can you really call actively supporting the development of FOSS drivers (releasing docs, paying someone to work on the code) is really "short-sightedness"?
                Dropping a driver that (in theory) fully supports my hardware for another one that will give me about 70% of the performance is *not* a step forward, even if the latter is FOSS. You just seem not to get it: being free software is not that important with a hardware driver like it is with other software. It certainly does not outweigh the loss of features and performance.

                If they would provide a "legacy" driver like NVIDIA does, I would be completely satisfied. Fix the remaining bugs and provide updates for new kernel and X versions on a regular basis. Doesn't need to be monthly and new features are not required.

                The short-sighedness is that they kept pissing me off for five years and now, finally, spat in my face one last time. I'm done with ATI.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Stormking View Post
                  Dropping a driver that (in theory) fully supports my hardware for another one that will give me about 70% of the performance is *not* a step forward, even if the latter is FOSS. You just seem not to get it: being free software is not that important with a hardware driver like it is with other software. It certainly does not outweigh the loss of features and performance.

                  If they would provide a "legacy" driver like NVIDIA does, I would be completely satisfied. Fix the remaining bugs and provide updates for new kernel and X versions on a regular basis. Doesn't need to be monthly and new features are not required.

                  The short-sighedness is that they kept pissing me off for five years and now, finally, spat in my face one last time. I'm done with ATI.
                  Forgive me for being picky, but since you mentioned earlier AMD promised to support your card on Linux: did they just promise to support it (like the driver does, and fairly well at that), or did they promise feature and performance parity with Windows? I really doubt that, honestly.

                  You're being a bit double-faced here. On the one hand, you ask AMD to keep their proprietary driver up-to-date and say you don't care about whether something is FOSS or not, on the other hand, you expect that closed driver to work with the latest FOSS technologies. This sounds to me like you've bought something that was meant for A and now you complain it doesn't work with B.

                  In other words, you're asking for the impossible.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by susikala View Post
                    Forgive me for being picky, but since you mentioned earlier AMD promised to support your card on Linux: did they just promise to support it (like the driver does, and fairly well at that), or did they promise feature and performance parity with Windows? I really doubt that, honestly.
                    I wrote that before, but again: About 80% of the time since I bought my laptop, at least one of the core features of the driver was broken. So no, I am not talking about "feature and performance parity with Windows", I am talking about OpenGL at a reasonable speed, Video Overlay and TV-Out. But instead of making these features work and stable, they spend their time to squeak another half FPS out of the driver to show of to the gamer boys.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Stormking View Post
                      I wrote that before, but again: About 80% of the time since I bought my laptop, at least one of the core features of the driver was broken. So no, I am not talking about "feature and performance parity with Windows", I am talking about OpenGL at a reasonable speed, Video Overlay and TV-Out. But instead of making these features work and stable, they spend their time to squeak another half FPS out of the driver to show of to the gamer boys.
                      Noisy wheel gets the grease; I really don't see anyone else being nearly so vocal about this and a single voice is...well, pitifully small next to the millions of dollars made off of other people. Of course, it worked just fine for me from the 2.6.12 to the 2.6.25 kernel (at which point ACPI stuff forced my hand and I transitioned to a more recent kernel and the open driver that, wonder of wonders, performs just fine). I suspect that for most users of it, this is also the case. Maybe they "weren't using the full potential of their hardware" or whatever, but the "works for me" is a valid bug-closer.

                      Really, you want a driver that "just works?" Great! I have an ugly white plastic and brushed aluminum thing I'd be willing to sell you for an exorbitant price!

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Wyatt View Post
                        I really don't see anyone else being nearly so vocal about this and a single voice is...well, pitifully small next to the millions of dollars made off of other people.
                        I know. But is this really a reason to be quiet? I don't think so. Even if I was the only one who was ripped off by ATI in this way, I would still be ripped off.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by MostAwesomeDude View Post
                          Eh? As far as I know nobody ships XFree86 anymore (thank God) so everybody's running Xorg and the big difference between stable and development heads of distros is the package version, nothing more.

                          For example, CentOS is neither development nor supported; it's stable in versioning but not actually part of the development downstream.
                          for the FGLRX catalyst driver this was not true becourse you can't install 9-2 Catylst on an Ubuntu 9.04!!!!!

                          so your speak is only true for the opensource driver!

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Stormking View Post
                            I'm done with ATI.
                            yes ATI is no more--- Hail to AMD!

                            ATI does a shit for linux/Opensource AMD does a lot!

                            Comment


                            • I'm curious. I have a x1600 mobility and so I won't be able to use catalyst with jaunty. Is there something like powerstate in the driver radeon or radeonHD?

                              Comment


                              • @bridgeman

                                You are right that R500 is not DX10 but DX9. But lots or current systems out there use it. You buy something new that you can not use with a new X or kernel (at least when 9-3 is _really_ the last driver). The OSS driver is enough to run compiz, wow, everybody is applauding.

                                You can not run any game right now that needs GLSL (I do not talk about optional support like for many open source games) - not even my favorite tank game Zero Ballistics ( http://zeroballistics.com/ ) would run then. Do you have got a realistic timeframe when this will be working?

                                Nv dropped support for binary drivers too, thats correct but not in the same way as ATI does. Support for ATI DX8 cards was dropped before the OSS driver was even capable of using TV Out.

                                If you have been able to play at least some games then you play now only really old ones with OSS, why don't you drop 3d support at all then, then you know that you have to boot Win and don't lose time to test if it would run.

                                Of course many Linux users would prefer to use OSS drivers, but please feature complete, not half way at max. A little performance loss would be ok, but if the apps (example: gl2benchmark) / games do not run at all? ATI can drop support when the OSS driver is _really_ ready not when you say in the future all will be better.

                                I can always say the future will be better. At some point the raw cpu power will be enough to use software only rendering (anybody liking to play Crysis with 5fps on i7?). But the time is now and the fglrx driver is not even working correctly in all usage cases. X ABI changes or kernel changes will require new legacy drivers, Nv does provides those needed for most cards (71.xx is the bad example for newer X support).

                                Do you really think that 9-3 will be so good that it does fix all issues which have been there for a long time? I know how ATI bugs are handled, they are carried for years and it is more likely that new bugs will be there than a bug is fixed.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X