Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

I just bought an nvidia card

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

  • #21
    Originally posted by tball View Post
    After my expirence its the opposite. Binary drivers break when new kernel releases. New kernel releases contains new open source drivers, which is designed to run on the specified kernel, so it won't break.
    I don't need a new kernel. I only need new drivers.

    As mirv says, you can always just download new drivers from xorg.org, and compile it to your kernel. Then you can have old kernels with new drivers.
    No thanks. I want to double click on it and have it installed.

    If you don't like to compile things, just install Arch, which is always updated with the latest stable driver releases.
    How does that solve the fundamental problem of drivers in Linux? On Windows I visit the Intel site, there I get the latest chipset drivers. I visit AMD, I get the latest GPU drivers. I visit Creative, I get the latest sound drivers. Etc, etc. I don't need a new Widows kernel. The one I have works OK.

    The whole model for drivers in Linux is one of the things keeping Linux away from normal users. I'm a Unix wirard, I know how to use it. But this model does suck for non-geeks (aka "normal people".)

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by RealNC View Post
      I don't need a new Widows kernel. The one I have works OK.
      You can't have better windows kernel.

      The whole model for drivers in Linux is one of the things keeping Linux away from normal users
      I think it doesn't keep people away from Linux. Getting the newest drivers for Ubuntu may be little complicated (and when comes to binary blobs it's almost the same as on Windows, but this way is worse IMHO), but in Arch, you simply upgrade your system and you don't have to visit any extra sites to find drivers. I don't see too much sense in providing packages for older kernels if you can have new distro for free.

      Comment


      • #23
        @RealNC

        I really have to ask you this question:
        Why do you use linux and not windows? All the things you like with an OS, is actually the way you do it on windows. So why not use windows and skip linux? Apparently you don't like the linux model, but prefer the windows model.

        Everything you say fits perfectly in a windows-world :-) Don't get me wrong. There is nothing wrong with that, and windows is a fairly good OS.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by RealNC View Post
          I don't need a new kernel. I only need new drivers.
          This is a weak strawman. libdrm and xf86-video-* are upgradable without even knowing what a kernel is.

          Originally posted by RealNC View Post
          No thanks. I want to double click on it and have it installed.
          I seriously hope you don't need a concept as simple as "package manager" spelling out to you...

          Originally posted by RealNC View Post
          How does that solve the fundamental problem of drivers in Linux? On Windows I visit the Intel site, there I get the latest chipset drivers. I visit AMD, I get the latest GPU drivers. I visit Creative, I get the latest sound drivers. Etc, etc. I don't need a new Widows kernel. The one I have works OK.

          The whole model for drivers in Linux is one of the things keeping Linux away from normal users. I'm a Unix wirard, I know how to use it. But this model does suck for non-geeks (aka "normal people".)
          Hunting the internet for random executable files spread across several websites, trusting the sites not to give you trojans, and then rebooting, is easier than opening aptitude and typing "driver" in the search box? Easier than clicking the notification icon in a default ubuntu install that FINDS the correct drivers and installs them for you??

          Not believing that BS for one second, pal. You're either trolling, or incredibly ignorant. Pick one.

          Comment


          • #25
            Typical geeks, I see. You dismiss me as a troll simply because I offer you the view of non-geeks. Your Ubuntu updates aren't working, pal. I have better things to do than update the entire OS every 6 months.

            And if not Ubuntu then Arch? Is this a joke? No one I know would even know how to begin installing that. It's a geek-OS for people who have a lot of free time.

            And why I don't use Windows? That's no concern of yours. I damn use whatever pleases me.

            You can label me a troll all you want. /care
            Last edited by RealNC; 02 June 2009, 05:21 PM.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by RealNC View Post
              Typical geeks, I see. You dismiss me as a troll simply because I offer you the view of non-geeks. Your Ubuntu updates aren't working, pal. I have better things to do than update the entire OS every 6 months.

              And if not Ubuntu then Arch? Is this a joke? No one I know would even know how to begin installing that. It's a geek-OS for people who have a lot of free time.

              And why I don't use Windows? That's no concern of yours. I damn use whatever pleases me.

              You can label me a troll all you want. /care
              Geeks? :P My grandma uses Ubuntu. She is actually able to do an upgrade of her drivers, because ubuntu does it for her.

              Why do you think browsing the web looking after a driver, is less timeconsuming than just install and then the opensource drivers is there automatically? I can reinstall ubuntu in 10 mins og less depending on my computer. If I had to look after binary drivers, it would take > 10 mins.

              This is not geek talk. Its not geeky letting ubuntu folks do your driver updates. I would says its geeky browsing the web for binary drivers, as I do for my brother and his windows because he isn't a geek at all, and doesn't know which driver he has to look for!

              Comment


              • #27
                Hmm, I find that your average home computer user most likely won't bother updating drivers much anyway. Windows will update drivers in the auto-update system these days (well, vista tries to when it can) so in that respect it's not all that different to running an update with a given linux distro package maintenance system.
                Of course, if users prefer a more point & click adventure, they'll go windows - let's face it, the folks at redmond have a lot of experience with that. Most linux distros have a different view. So basically, if you like the way things are done on windows, use windows. If you like how [insert favourite linux distro here or MacOSX or whatever] does things, use that instead. (btw - I use gentoo)

                To keep this thread slightly on-topic, I should say that nvidia tried to do things a little more the windows way by replacing the glx stack with their own implementation. I often wonder if this will come back and haunt them one day.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                  I don't need a new kernel...
                  Yes, you think Windows way is easier because YOU have invested a lot of time and effort to get use to it. A non-geek 'normal' user will find the windows way confusing too that why local PC shops charges 100 dollars per hour to get customer's video card driver installed for them.

                  Dismiss other methods because your one is more familiar to you is a bit too subjective isn't it?

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by mirv View Post
                    To keep this thread slightly on-topic, I should say that nvidia tried to do things a little more the windows way by replacing the glx stack with their own implementation. I often wonder if this will come back and haunt them one day.
                    You know, they could always be evil and go for Gallium3D when it's ready. :3 (who honestly can say for sure that they have never internally tried doing experimental DRM drivers, found out they're not worth the effort and scrapped them in a junkyard of code)

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by FunkyRider View Post
                      A non-geek 'normal' user will find the windows way confusing too that why local PC shops charges 100 dollars per hour to get customer's video card driver installed for them.
                      Actually I suspect asking for a hundred bucks per hour for that kind of a job is another way to say "quit wasting our time, you silly guy". And they'd be right. If you want a pro to do irrelevant stuff, they will still require their usual pay.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X