Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Future of my support for ATI

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

  • How many(Those who have ATI hardware) Windows users are gamers?
    How I hate this old lame excuse. People "want" to game on Linux but if the AAAs ignore Linux and even throw stones in their way ( like Steam did consider Wine a cheat some time ago before people bashed it enough for this ) then there can be no more games. Keeping something "artificially" low doesn't justify such a comment.

    you can't deny that Windows is wat GREATER OS for gaming
    If you ever did game development you should know that Linux is better suited for gaming since it has a couple of advantages over the windows counterpart. I need to provide more "strange hacks" in windows to get a game working than under Linux. So much for "greater OS" I would say. Or shall we take out the Windows-Version-Nausea problem? Change to Vista and games start breaking left and right and still nowadays games are tagged in small print "Vista SHOULD be supported" or "no 64 bit support". Now that's a great gaming OS right?

    Furthermore ATI and nVidia have this thing called "unified architecture". Furthermore ATI drivers are there... just bugged. And third... video playback is used a big time more than actual gaming on Linux or Windows.

    And finally Linux is no more a great minority. After all even Microsoft recognized it as a force to reckon with and PC vendors consider it as OS to preinstall. I don't think a "great minority" would have achieved this, not?

    Comment


    • you can't deny that Windows is wat GREATER OS for gaming
      No. It's not windows, it's something called a game console. And whose chip is in Xbox360/Wii/Gamecube again?

      Comment


      • Maybe most of you will not agree with me but I don't see that big of a fuss over OS drivers vs. proprietary drivers for video cards or anything else.

        I understand that hardware manufacturers cannot release the code for drivers and stuff like that because of IP agreement.

        However, I think that most users just want their hardware to work! Why does it matter if the driver is proprietary or open source as long as it works?

        I have a laptop with Intel GMA 950 using the Open Source driver. I can say am NOT impressed but mostly satisfied.
        My problems with that Card/driver are:

        Compiz: while it runs... I cannot properly run other 3D applications. I get all kinds of tearing. Try Google Earth with Compiz enabled!


        No acceleration on multiple X-sessions: Only the first logged in user can use hardware acceleration and has direct rendering.

        Cannot have a video on 2 workspaces at the same time as in this video:
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6bRpsqr7D0 (2:30 - 2:55)

        Every once in a while acceleration is not available: no Direct rendering (something is "unset")


        For all I know people using nVidia cards and Drivers (proprietary) can have Direct Rendering over multiple X-sessions and can also have the same Video playback on multiple workspaces (as seen in the vide above)

        So even if Intel released all the documents so there is a stable open-source driver, the nVidia Proprietary driver still provides more functionality.

        I don't care which driver I use as long as I have 3D support for all logged in users, and 3D apps run properly with Compiz!


        Edit: For some reason I re-enabled compiz and I can do pretty much everything (except 3D support for all logged in users).
        Last edited by Alecz; 08-08-2008, 12:16 PM.

        Comment


        • I personally could also live with prop drivers... if they would work. And this is the problem here. If you can make a working driver, okay, I can live with closed specs but if your drivers are clearly broken meaning you ( the vendor ) is incapable of producing a working driver, then I ought to say you are obligated to open the specs so others who can do a working driver can take a stab at it. That's in a nutshell all I'm getting at... nothing more, nothing less.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Alecz View Post
            Maybe most of you will not agree with me but I don't see that big of a fuss over OS drivers vs. proprietary drivers for video cards or anything else.

            I understand that hardware manufacturers cannot release the code for drivers and stuff like that because of IP agreement.

            However, I think that most users just want their hardware to work! Why does it matter if the driver is proprietary or open source as long as it works?

            I have a laptop with Intel GMA 950 using the Open Source driver. I can say am NOT impressed but mostly satisfied.
            My problems with that Card/driver are:

            Compiz: while it runs... I cannot properly run other 3D applications. I get all kinds of tearing. Try Google Earth with Compiz enabled!

            No acceleration on multiple X-sessions: Only the first logged in user can use hardware acceleration and has direct rendering.

            Cannot have a video on 2 workspaces at the same time as in this video:
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6bRpsqr7D0 (2:30 - 2:55)

            Every once in a while acceleration is not available: no Direct rendering (something is "unset")


            For all I know people using nVidia cards and Drivers (proprietary) can have Direct Rendering over multiple X-sessions and can also have the same Video playback on multiple workspaces (as seen in the vide above)

            So even if Intel released all the documents so there is a stable open-source driver, the nVidia Proprietary driver still provides more functionality.

            I don't care which driver I use as long as I have 3D support for all logged in users and 3D apps run properly with Compiz!
            The debate is not so much over driver features and capabilities, but more of system wide stability and integration. Open source drivers are much better at this.

            Comment


            • However, I think that most users just want their hardware to work! Why does it matter if the driver is proprietary or open source as long as it works?
              Imagine nVidia would suddenly decide linux' marketshare doesn't justify continuing their linux-driver anymore. You'd be in deep trouble as the next time the Xorg-api changes you're video card will be nothing more but an expensive paperweight.

              Comment


              • I see your point... that would make the driver "not work" though.

                Comment


                • But the chance of this to happen is a reason for why it maters right now if the driver is proprietary or FOSS.

                  Comment


                  • So if nVidia does not have OSS drivers. Why is everyone bashing ATI and praising nVidia?

                    At least ATI helps the community with OSS drivers, while nVidia doesn't (or does it?).

                    So all those people that are currently very glad they chose nVidia might soon be left in the dark...

                    Comment


                    • > However, I think that most users just want their hardware
                      > to work! Why does it matter if the driver is proprietary
                      > or open source as long as it works?

                      Because binary drivers don't work. They cause data loss
                      and have security holes. Completely unacceptable.

                      Why is this thread attacking ATI when they have apparently
                      seen the light and are releasing docs?

                      Someone mentioned chipsets as being documented. Where are
                      the docs on how to implement SATA NCQ on nforce4?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X