Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A First Look At The 2010 Linux Graphics Survey Results

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

  • #16
    For the next Linux Graphics Survey, it would be nice if the "Which version of the X Server do you run?" question could include which major distributions are using what version (e.g. X Server 1.7 (Ubuntu 10.04, ...)).

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by JantarMantar View Post
      I never understood why people deeply care about open source drivers. Does Microsoft spend any of their resources to develop drivers for various hardwares? To me, developing open source drivers makes sense only if the manufacturer isn't willing to provide Linux drivers. IMHO, writing and improving applications that compete and beat similar applications available on other platforms is better use of talented people's skills.

      Cheers
      Why?
      How about because my hardware literally CAN'T do what I want it to do with blob drivers. The ONLY possibility is open source drivers. This hardware CAN'T work properly in wondoze, this hardware CAN'T work properly with blob drivers.

      Read this thread: http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24480
      You will see what kind of weird hacks I need to use.

      On top of that;
      1) To implement all of the features applicable to the platform rather than just features applicable to wondoze --- i.e. KMS.
      2) To not be dependent on anyone to support the latest kernel/xorg.
      3) Because withOUT EXCEPTION, the open source graphics drivers are FAR MORE STABLE than any of the blobs.

      etc.

      Comment


      • #18
        I would like to point out that some of the questions don't offer any applicable answer.... i.e. the one about classifying your use of linux.... i.e. how about a professional who is NOT involved in 2d or 3d graphics?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
          3) Because withOUT EXCEPTION, the open source graphics drivers are FAR MORE STABLE than any of the blobs.
          you obviously haven't tried the evergreen 3d code yet

          ok, those should be classified as "beta".. still, stability is not an intrinsic property of open source software. It's just somewhat easier to achieve in the OSS gfx drivers due to reduced features, thus reduced code complexity.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by rohcQaH View Post
            This would have been an opportunity to cross-reference data - this is unfortunately not possible with the reduced charts. Example:
            - how many users of multiple displays actually want hot-plug? How many need hot-plug, but use only 1 monitor (i.e. plug in the projector for a presentation)?
            - compare the percentage of binary vs. oss users by interests. Are people interested in video accel more likely to use binary drivers? Do "professional" users prefer the performance of binary drivers or the robustness of the OSS stack?
            - are gamers more likely to pick nvidia over ati for wine gaming? By how much? Are there gamers with intel hardware?

            Write a script to cross-reference everything that sounds reasonable and make a graph for each (labeled "GPU vendor for people who picked 'gaming enthusiast'" etc). Pick the graphs that deviate from the global average and point out the differences. I'm sure there are plenty of interesting results in there.
            I agree, data sorted like that would definitely be far more useful and interesting to read.

            Comment


            • #21
              Resorted to editing xorg.conf? Heck, I prefer doing it that way

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by curaga View Post
                Resorted to editing xorg.conf? Heck, I prefer doing it that way
                I suspect most people don't even need one anymore. I only need one to activate Zaphod mode.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Like I said before, I don't do ANYTHING to configure X. It works out of the box with free drivers, at native resolution, without needing anything.

                  I don't have an xorg.conf and I don't use anything else.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Well, I would only *need* it for setting my keyboard and some driver options, but I prefer to have it because explicit settings are always faster than any kind of autoscanning.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by rohcQaH View Post
                      you obviously haven't tried the evergreen 3d code yet

                      ok, those should be classified as "beta".. still, stability is not an intrinsic property of open source software. It's just somewhat easier to achieve in the OSS gfx drivers due to reduced features, thus reduced code complexity.
                      The LCD monitor on my file server freaks out when I boot up with nouveau. It complains about invalid video formats over and over and I can't get the messages to go away. When I use the nvidia driver it works just fine.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I really only use xorg.conf nowadays for enabling color tiling in radeon.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          You didn't think thoroughly about resolution choices. Come on, today's laptops are often equipped with a 1440 x 900 screen - to which category would You qualify it, less than 1280 x 1024 or less than 1600 x 1200?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by rohcQaH View Post
                            stability is not an intrinsic property of open source software.
                            It actually is.
                            Because of the infinite variation of packages, versions, and patchsets, something dynamic, like open source drivers, which can be adjusted to match the particular conditions, will naturally be more stable than a static blob that is designed for a much more rigid set of conditions.

                            It's just somewhat easier to achieve in the OSS gfx drivers due to reduced features, thus reduced code complexity.
                            Complexity of code isn't necessarily a reason for something to be unstable. More like the fact that all the blobs are just windoze drivers shoehorned into a totally incompatible system... and the dynamic nature of the operating system obviously, as mentioned above, needs a more dynamic driver.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by frantaylor View Post
                              The LCD monitor on my file server freaks out when I boot up with nouveau. It complains about invalid video formats over and over and I can't get the messages to go away. When I use the nvidia driver it works just fine.
                              99.9% probable that your monitor is the unstable one in this equation. It is probably sending back a defective EDID. The blob driver may have an override for that particular monitor... which you are free to implement in the open source driver if you wish.

                              Note: It is NOT the job of the driver to override defective input data, it is the job of the monitor to provide good information about its characteristics. If this weren't the case, then there would be no need to supply an EDID -- just manufacturer and model ID numbers.

                              Here's how you can force a mode without having to hack the driver: http://nouveau.freedesktop.org/wiki/KernelModeSetting

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by m_gol View Post
                                You didn't think thoroughly about resolution choices. Come on, today's laptops are often equipped with a 1440 x 900 screen - to which category would You qualify it, less than 1280 x 1024 or less than 1600 x 1200?
                                In this case, I would actually multiply them all out and use a pixel count for figuring this out.

                                1440x900=1296000
                                1280x1024=1310720
                                1600x1200=1920000

                                So the 1440x900 would fit under the 1280x1024

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X