10.4/fglrx in Lucid w/ ATI HD 4xxx or 5xxx

[bridgman]

The open source drivers already exist for 6xx/7xx so not sure where the delay would come from...

[PsynoKhi0]

Hopefully next time when there are new legacy cards these work directly not 1+ years after last fglrx driver for em.

Damn... When that happens there will be one less thing for you to farm post count with pointless whining Tough...

But fear not! There might still be hope in case video acceleration still isn't good enough for your taste! Actually I've written a letter for bridgman to use (licensed under Creative Commons so I won't sue anyone):

PRIORITY : CRITICAL

To whom it may concern,
I hereby pledge the fglrx development team to stop focusing its bug tracking efforts on any topic that might impact our paying business customers, to instead focus on Xv video output - because you know, it's the only thing that counts - for the sake of one guy on the Phoronix forums who almost prouds himself for not having shelled out the money for the only ATI card he owns.

Sarcasm aside, but right before I stop being polite, how much thought do you put in your posts here? Do you SERIOUSLY think you help push things forward with that attitude?

[Kano]

to define a driver at least basically feature complete it has to run these things without any errors and REASONABLE speed compared to fglrx. it does not help when it runs like a dia show.

a) gl2benchmark
b) zero ballistics
c) all common oss games - you find serveral in pts
d) ut2004, quake4, etqw
e) specviewperf

when a card is dropped before then something is wrong with the policy.

[bridgman]

With respect, your list might be just the tiniest bit Kano-centric

[Kano]

The first apps directly show glsl errors. specviewperf is just an extra, but game speed should be compared with all features set to max. When a highend cards with oss is slower than a lowend with fglrx then something is wrong.