Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Drivers for linux are rubbish

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

  • Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    How about proprietary OSSv3 drivers for audio cards?

    How are those doing?

    Or proprietary ethernet adapter drivers?

    Good things come to those who wait

    This from the man who was of the opinion in this very same thread that he didn't want to program OR wait for things in Open Source which already exist in closed source apps. The same man who told someone else to watch HD Video in Windows because Bluray doesn't read on Linux.

    Make your mind up.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by IsawSparks View Post
      It may not stay like this, but until ATI offers a fully functional closed source driver, nvidia-glx will be the driver of choice of for a fully functional desktop linux experience at the high and midrange end.

      For the lower to midrange, even the Intel Integrated solutions (save for Clarkdale) offer better performance and more functionality than the ATI closed or open sourced drivers.
      Huh?
      Or are you referring solely to video playback acceleration? In which case, that's not all there is to a "desktop linux experience".

      Comment


      • Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
        ATi started with open source and turned to a proprietary solution, and went back after seeing how much work that is and how little people like it.
        Actually we believe that the need for proprietary drivers is as strong as ever (at least for high end discrete GPU markets), but that *only* having proprietary binary drivers was not a sufficient solution. The open source graphics project was resourced separately from existing fglrx work and did not take any resources away from it, ie we were not shifting from proprietary to open source but rather adding open source support as another option.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by mirv View Post
          Huh?
          Or are you referring solely to video playback acceleration? In which case, that's not all there is to a "desktop linux experience".
          I was very clear. I said fully functional desktop Linux experience. I watch a lot of HD video and so it's a basic function of my desktop computing experience.


          Every time I go back to Windows 7, I realise how much I hate it in comparison because I lose nothing important in Linux (nvidia-glx) save for Flash acceleration (and even that can be worked around using VDPAU version of gnash).

          I find Windows to be so outmoded in the way it works and performs in comparison to Linux. When something slows in Linux, I know why and know how to fix it. In Windows I'm continually at the mercy of MS and poor documentation and I'm an expert Windows user.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by IsawSparks View Post
            I was very clear. I said fully functional desktop Linux experience. I watch a lot of HD video and so it's a basic function of my desktop computing experience.


            Every time I go back to Windows 7, I realise how much I hate it in comparison because I lose nothing important in Linux (nvidia-glx) save for Flash acceleration (and even that can be worked around using VDPAU version of gnash).

            I find Windows to be so outmoded in the way it works and performs in comparison to Linux. When something slows in Linux, I know why and know how to fix it. In Windows I'm continually at the mercy of MS and poor documentation and I'm an expert Windows user.
            Ok, thanks for the clarification. I'll just have to disagree that intel is better than amd (open source or close binary) for a desktop experience.
            I personally prefer fgrlx over nvidia stuff, but that's just with my experiences. Others prefer the nvidia binaries. I guess it depends exactly on what kind of desktop you use.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by bridgman View Post
              Actually we believe that the need for proprietary drivers is as strong as ever (at least for high end discrete GPU markets), but that *only* having proprietary binary drivers was not a sufficient solution. The open source graphics project was resourced separately from existing fglrx work and did not take any resources away from it, ie we were not shifting from proprietary to open source but rather adding open source support as another option.
              That's a rather positive, yet subtle spin on the whole situation.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by IsawSparks View Post
                This from the man who was of the opinion in this very same thread that he didn't want to program OR wait for things in Open Source which already exist in closed source apps.
                No, actually, I didn't say that, it's just that you're an idiot.

                The same man who told someone else to watch HD Video in Windows because Bluray doesn't read on Linux.
                I told you that if you find performance so important that you'll ditch open source for a few fps and a few watts, then you should use closed source. Like the nvidia drivers, CoreAVC, Windows, Sony rootkit, XBox, knock yourself out.

                You should just be aware that there are people who will not ditch open source for a few fps or a few watts, and the open source drivers are at a state where most of us don't have to.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by IsawSparks View Post
                  What are you talking about? You run some other OS than what's provided on your phone?
                  Sure. Its a little known operating system called ANDROID, which is OPEN SOURCE: http://source.android.com/

                  The HARDWARE vendor has only produced system images up to 1.6 despite 2.1 being current. What kind of hacker doesn't build the latest version and use that instead?

                  And as it happened, the jump from 1.6 to 2.1 had a similar result to an xserver upgrade -- it broke all the existing hardware accelerated GPU drivers -- they have since been worked around, but for a time, if you wanted a 7201 on android 2.1, you did without GL and video decode accel.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                    Actually we believe that the need for proprietary drivers is as strong as ever (at least for high end discrete GPU markets), but that *only* having proprietary binary drivers was not a sufficient solution.
                    Yes, but your proprietary support focuses on modern hardware and stable enterprise distributions. This makes your (well, the fglrx team's) life easier.

                    Supporting every possible combination of hardware and distro is a lot of work that works far better when the drivers are open. Wasn't this one of the reasons why the support for older chipsets was dropped?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                      Actually we believe that the need for proprietary drivers is as strong as ever (at least for high end discrete GPU markets), but that *only* having proprietary binary drivers was not a sufficient solution. The open source graphics project was resourced separately from existing fglrx work and did not take any resources away from it, ie we were not shifting from proprietary to open source but rather adding open source support as another option.
                      I may be missing something here, but how does being closed source and proprietary improve the suitability of the drivers for "high end discrete GPU markets"? Assuming that you had two equally/equivalently functional drivers, one open and one closed, what benefit could being closed bring?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                        No, actually, I didn't say that, it's just that you're an idiot.


                        I told you that if you find performance so important that you'll ditch open source for a few fps and a few watts, then you should use closed source. Like the nvidia drivers, CoreAVC, Windows, Sony rootkit, XBox, knock yourself out.

                        You should just be aware that there are people who will not ditch open source for a few fps or a few watts, and the open source drivers are at a state where most of us don't have to.
                        Right, the idiot is not the person whose posts contradict themselves and tells people on a Linux forum to use Windows.

                        Sony Rootkit? 2004 is calling you from its DVD collection.

                        I'll use my hardware and software the way I want thanksverymuch. I know it may not please you that my combination of closed source drivers and open sourced everything works 100% of the time with games and HD video, but it pleases me a whole hell of lot.

                        In the vernacular, suffer in ya jocks mate.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
                          Sure. Its a little known operating system called ANDROID, which is OPEN SOURCE: http://source.android.com/

                          The HARDWARE vendor has only produced system images up to 1.6 despite 2.1 being current. What kind of hacker doesn't build the latest version and use that instead?

                          And as it happened, the jump from 1.6 to 2.1 had a similar result to an xserver upgrade -- it broke all the existing hardware accelerated GPU drivers -- they have since been worked around, but for a time, if you wanted a 7201 on android 2.1, you did without GL and video decode accel.
                          You never said which version of the OS, you only talked about the phone itself. You also said it was an ARMv5, when it's actually ARMv6/11.

                          Knowing what you own and how to communicate yourself accurately makes conversation a whole lot more constructive. I read just fine the problem is you don't communicate effectively.

                          It's nice that you can follow a guide online and build a new version of the Android OS, but that doesn't make you a hacker. It may make you a hack though.

                          Also, isn't your 7201 a multi core chipset? That might explain the performance capability. That said it's definitely not capable of proper full rate 720P MPEG2 sans GPU acceleration and the screens res would never let the video reach full rate anyway. MPEG2 is res dependant, unlike AVC and VC-1 ASP.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
                            I may be missing something here, but how does being closed source and proprietary improve the suitability of the drivers for "high end discrete GPU markets"? Assuming that you had two equally/equivalently functional drivers, one open and one closed, what benefit could being closed bring?
                            Simply reusing the Windows Catalyst driver, with 10+ years of engineering and know-how in it?

                            Unfortunately, that one can not be open sourced, for a variety of reasons.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by IsawSparks View Post
                              I read just fine
                              Apparently not

                              Comment


                              • You guys can argue all day long but the fact of the matter not every Linux user shares the same demands or philosophies. It's supposed to be about options and choice, isn't it?

                                Even you open source extremists seem to admit that the driver can't do everything so the binary driver is requires for some features/uses. But, if it is a secondary priority and inferior to the nvidia driver, then there isn't a good choice, is it?

                                The fact it's based on commercial needs and the workstation market means the open source priority is limited and the binary choice isn't any better than the Nvidia option. What is needed, imho, is continual improvement of both drivers and some more emphasis on the binary since the FOSS drivers will never get the full support meaning 3D and licensed features. Just because you don't need a feature doesn't mean they should follow your requirements! The video card is capable of hardware acceleration among other features so it should be supported for that. Whether it's an open source method or closed, it benefits all uers and owners of the card if there is SOME option for using the card for that feature.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X