Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Nouveau Companion 40

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by deanjo View Post
    There are so much 1/2 finished, abandoned, or just poorly developed foss software out there that I really would have to say that proprietary stuff has a better record of project completion simply for the fact that the majority of the developers are getting paid to do so. Over 2/3's of sourceforge for example comprises of projects that never got off the ground, never completed or unmaintained for example. Commercial closed source development generally doesn't abandon development until a project is at least to a certian level of completion unless absolutely necessary.
    You don't know about all the half-arsed proprietary projects out there, so how can you compare? The fact that they are closed source means you can't even catalog them. Saying that OSS is inherently worse than proprietary software just because you are aware of more incomplete open source software projects is disingenuous. The only reason you are aware that they are incomplete is because they are open source.


    Just a note on NVIDIA and their "quality drivers". I have had numerous unresolved issues with my 7900gs on both Linux and Vista. Some of these I've had for more than a year. To me, NVIDIA exemplify the benefit of open source drivers at least. When a manufacturer decides to stop supporting your product (and in the graphics world a refresh seems to be every 6 months), then with proprietary software you are left with peanuts. Windows devs themselves recognised the issue with device drivers. They apparently have been the cause for most of the Windows crashes in their past OSs. For Vista they decided to go down the driver signing route, which seems a bit silly since they only thing it guarentees is that the company can afford to purchase a Certificate from a CA and purchase the WDK signing kit or whatever. It's a pity that Microsoft dislikes open source stuff so much, because having some form of open source drivers in Windows would be infinitely more useful to their OS team than these "signed" drivers.

    Comment


    • #17
      Where did the train go?

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by yesterday View Post
        Just a note on NVIDIA and their "quality drivers". I have had numerous unresolved issues with my 7900gs on both Linux and Vista. Some of these I've had for more than a year. To me, NVIDIA exemplify the benefit of open source drivers at least. When a manufacturer decides to stop supporting your product (and in the graphics world a refresh seems to be every 6 months), then with proprietary software you are left with peanuts. Windows devs themselves recognised the issue with device drivers. They apparently have been the cause for most of the Windows crashes in their past OSs. For Vista they decided to go down the driver signing route, which seems a bit silly since they only thing it guarentees is that the company can afford to purchase a Certificate from a CA and purchase the WDK signing kit or whatever. It's a pity that Microsoft dislikes open source stuff so much, because having some form of open source drivers in Windows would be infinitely more useful to their OS team than these "signed" drivers.
        Everything is relative. I didn't say their perfect. I said they where industry leading. Just buy a ATI card and use it for a few years. You'll learn to appreciate NVidia (no matter what OS).

        Don't get me wrong, I appreciate AMD/ATI attempts to support the OS community, but the drivers are simply not as good as the ones we get from NVidia on both Windows and Linux (for now).

        Comment

        Working...
        X