Unpleasant install experience. HD5850 Ubuntu 10.4.

[mugginz]

were are the impacts of your naiv hope if you don't trust me because i'm not "credible" ?

Impacts? Well, I think it's better that people to at least try to be accurate but consider that the Phoronix forums have significant "Google Juice" and it wouldn't be unusual to see a Phoronix post come up in a search by someone exploring their choices for a graphics card to be used with a Linux system.

If you give a random Googler the impression that the days of bad ATI drivers are now over and it's now safe to buy an ATI card and be provided a first class experience then you are providing false hope that could wind up with an individual buying a card that give a poor outcome when used with Linux. For various reasons that should be obvious to you this is bad.

get this only evil humans need "credible" to rip naiv humans with hope like you.

That's absolutely rubbish.

I'm not really worth listening to thats true.

but credible is pointless all over all because either you're able to recognize the truth or you are lost all over all.

I disagree. There's many circumstances in which an individual may be trying to form a view of a previously unexplored area and who will tend to be reliant on the views and experiences of others. Someone looking to form a view of good choices to make with respect to Linux compatible graphics cards may come across these forums. It's be good if the information here was as accurate as possible.

and no one can help you in the world's Dilemma of 'there is no trust all over the world.' and 'there is no credibility all over all for no one-'

There are many who try to be accurate and unbiased and while some may be blinded by brand elegance. I prefer a world were more people try to remain accurate.

Rational thinking is just the lost of ability of recognise a trueness of a effect without a apparent cause or an cause without an apparent effect means not all in the world are a function of Causality.

'only 'evil' humans need 'credibility' to abuse and was naiv humans'

Evil people know naiv people think rational and linear and only in direct Causality this kind of people 'victim's' can not think over several corners.

'Good' people do not need credibility because they just point the trueness and the trueness itself is the 'point of view' and Evil people don't have trueness they only have credibility to blind naiv humans.

I think you probably look to find another definition for the Engligh word "credibility." It's by no means a bad thing to have.

is this the true? i think the fglrx can not deliver the functionality of what it purports to deliver.

this is like the biggest tank in the 'Swamp' 20m below the surface
o well yes the catalyst is the biggest tank with all this high skilled killing features but you have only 1h left to life because your Air to breathe goes to zero 20m below the surface in the Swamp.




an nvidia card is just like a big Tank without a exit door all exits are Welded.
and if your tank goes down in the Swamp you can't exit.
and the Radeon driver is just the Emergency exit of the cloused source Swamp!

i don't wana sit in an tank without an Emergency Exit!

This emergency exit you speak of. The handle on it works for some people but not for other people. It depends on the nature of the work load the user happens to be holding at the time. Some will be able to reach for and unlock the emergency exit while others with a more demanding work load could be better off with the nVidia emergency exit.

[Jecos]

and Heroes of Newerth doesn't even run... what... the.... ****!

that's icing on the shit cake.. gah .. now i gotta search for why..


Fantastic.

[mugginz]

Credibility is the Faith/belief in an person and in this belief they do not proof the person or the true because of the Credibility.

but Faith/belief means they do not know it thats because Faith is not Knowledge and Credibility do not base on Knowledge.

in my point of view Credibility is an naiv backward limited kind of thinking about the opinion of other humans.

If the result of being accurate and truthful is credibility I don't see that credibility is a bad thing.

you don't answer my question about the Impact of my lack of credibility ??

For me your lack of credibility is that I simply don't trust what you say. As far as others are concerned you'd have to ask them.

But...

I find this statement by you more curious, and more bizarre.

get this only evil humans need "credible" to rip naiv humans with hope like you.

If you feel that the sole purpose of credibility is to first attain it and then to abuse it to trick and con others then I guess that makes you and me even more different than I thought.

i don't talk to people they should trust me and i don't require credibility from the people.

i use amd card's and i use the open and cloused driver and my next card is an amd card.
but in this forum its simpel customers of amd do not have credibility and amd haters and nvidia customers do have credibility.

its so easy to get behind this fucked credibility stuff.

If you use AMD cards that's fine with me but that's not what I'm complaining about.

ah phoronix is the 'Nineteen Eighty-Four' Ministry of Truth

its hard to work for the ministry of truth to keep the truth in the right way. isn't it ?

Dude, I don't see why you have such a problem with me wanting you to be accurate.

they try it but everyone 'fail' they fail because there are million differend kind of mainboard and chipsets and cpus and monitors and tausend other stuff means no one can be 'accurate' in talking about an driver 'quality' you need to be like GOD to be accurate.

No. While there'll always be corner cases that differ from the main experience, there's nothing wrong with basing your reports on the normal experience with perhaps mention of where things might differ when you're aware of possible variations.

with the nvidia emergency exit of the cloused source driver ?

nvidia do not have an emergency exit ;-)

The Nouveau driver writers might disagree by I was referring to the fact that sometimes the open drivers aren't an option at all. If an end users' requirements aren't met by the open drivers, then to them the open drivers may as well not exist at all which would leave them in the same boat you say nVidia users are in. Further, in cases where the nVidia blob is superior to fglrx the blob itself is an emergency exit from fglrx's problems.

[Kano]

Currently somebody must be really stupid when he owns a card with vdpau support and uses nouveau - even when some of those cards are already supported. Only when you have got very basic demands then you will be happy with nouveau. But the current driver 256.xx still supports cards down to GeForce 6 series with was introduced 2004. I think that's good enough legacy support.

[mugginz]

Currently somebody must be really stupid when he owns a card with vdpau support and uses nouveau - even when some of those cards are already supported. Only when you have got very basic demands then you will be happy with nouveau. But the current driver 256.xx still supports cards down to GeForce 6 series with was introduced 2004. I think that's good enough legacy support.

If they have really simple demands then Nouveau may suit but that's not what I'm really getting at. When Q talks of an emergency exit I assume he's talking about scenarios where the closed driver isn't functional. I myself would go with the blob every time.

The use of nVidia's blob, even though it's quite reliable and fully featured, is in Q's mind a bad option. He thinks that it's closed nature makes it evil. I'd prefer it to be open, but I'm not going to get my wish any time soon. That aside, I've found the blob to be very good indeed and wish I could say the same of fglrx. With any luck it may soon be. When it is I'll be most happy to recommend ATI hardware for use with Linux. For now I generally only recommend ATI cards for Windows boxes.

[Panix]

I, too, perceive Q's argument to be that line of thinking. I also suspect the logic goes along this as well: both binary blobs are not good but ati is the 'lesser evil' since they at least offer somewhat of a functional OSS driver compared to nouveau? I could be wrong and I probably shouldn't assume anyone's perspective but that is my impression.

How good is an 'exit' or alternative strategy if there's still functions or issues with the card even though it's an open source option? It seems Q is willing to compromise functionality for 'ethical idealism.' or to support open source preference. I am sure that is worded badly but these types of arguments seem to be very prominent and can go into great detail in threads like these.

It's frustrating that 'one side' argues for one co., ATI, and ATI delivers drivers lacking compared to Nvidia but because they have a 'better open source alternative' or option, they are preferred and said to be 'less evil' simply because of providing more code. But, functionality, bugs, slow development... who cares... the free driver trumps all problems.

I want to support the choice with the OSS 'safeguard' but if this results in a requirement to boot Windoze (can't be more closed than that!) to get the use I want to get out of my card, what good is that option? Not everyone can just overlook bugs/problems or restrictions on their hardware. That's why, I must challenge ATI's delivery of their drivers and why can't their Linux side be a lot more comparable to the Nvidia/Linux side or the ATI/Windows side? Still waiting for answers on that one. I doubt they're coming any time soon.

That's my two cents. FWIW. Sorry to interrupt and carry on...

[Kano]

Well nouveau is not that bad when it works. For older cards it is not the worst driver, when you mainly just do internet/office tasks. You have got kms and i finally manged to unload nouveau (inside screen) even with a live system and install nv binary in case it is needed. The reboot way was a bit boring (or the nouveau.modeset=0 or radeon.modeset=0 hack). Will try that for fglrx later too.

[Panix]

and you are wrong by thinking the FGLRX does anything better than the opensource driver for the most *i* do with my pc the radeon is just the better choise.

And there's the magic trick, isn't it? *I*. What *you* do with your computer. What if someone wants to use 3D? What if they want hardware acceleration? I don't own an Evergreen card but from my understanding, you don't have 3D capabilities with the open source driver yet. Use Google Earth? You can't with the FOSS radeon driver if you have an Evergreen card. There's 2D features you can't use or other potential annoyances as well, I bet. Then the train wreck all repeats itself when the kernel is upgraded or you go to an XServer revision? How is this open source solution an exit for *everyone?* It might be for you? You might not need *those* features. But, other users might actually want them.

The problem is the open source drivers are not extensive enough or all encompassing. They're a good fall back but it seems they aren't able to offer that in certain cases. Ideal yes, but practical? Very questionable and varies from user to user. For now, there needs to be major improvement and if not in the FOSS driver, then the FGLRX driver. I used to have a MythTV box. ATI cards would be useless for that. No hardware accleration, tearing when watching video and lack of various 2D features. That's just an example.

The installation is complicated enough and then when it's fully installed, you're lacking numerous features? At least, when you're done the Nvidia install nightmare, you can use your card.

[bridgman]

Panix, you seem to be mixing proprietary and open source issues to create a "worst of both worlds" illusion again. I'm sure that is not your intention.

Initial EXA, Xv and 3D acceleration code for Evergreen was pushed yesterday, so the open source driver support should catch up with 6xx/7xx pretty quickly now.

I haven't heard of any 2D features missing from the open source drivers, can you elaborate ?

The open source drivers *are* in the kernel and Xorg trees so they get updated at the same time as the kernel/Xorg code. Compatibility with new kernel/xorg versions is primarily an issue for proprietary drivers.

Tearing is primarily an issue with the proprietary drivers. You mentioned missing 2D features again, what 2D features do you think are missing ?

[Panix]

Panix, you seem to be mixing proprietary and open source issues to create a "worst of both worlds" illusion again. I'm sure that is not your intention.

Initial EXA, Xv and 3D acceleration code for Evergreen was pushed yesterday, so the open source driver support should catch up with 6xx/7xx pretty quickly now.

I haven't heard of any 2D features missing from the open source drivers, can you elaborate ?

The open source drivers *are* in the kernel and Xorg trees so they get updated at the same time as the kernel/Xorg code. Compatibility with new kernel/xorg versions is primarily an issue for proprietary drivers.

Tearing is primarily an issue with the proprietary drivers. You mentioned missing 2D features again, what 2D features do you think are missing ?

Not sure what illusion you're speaking of. The 2D Acceleration is problem free?

Sounds like there's still no xvba support and going on a full year. Source:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd_xvba_vaapi&num=1

http://phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19983

Comments in the forum about xvba still not working. This has been discussed in this forum for over a year and others as well.

Still bugs and only now just maturing drivers but no confirmation of it being fully supported. Unlike Nvidia which has Fermi cards supported already in 1.8 and probably soon even in XServer 1.9:

http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25495

Since, it's safe to guess Nvidia cards will be supported in XServer 1.9 before ATI cards, one could argue that you get the worst of both worlds when using ATI cards. Always behind, despite better hardware and always with restrictions (including bugs and features) on your cards regardless of whether it's closed or open source. How can you argue otherwise?

But, yes, I'd still like to choose an Evergreen card but I prefer both OSS and Catalyst drivers working for what I want to do. I read that it's asserted the OSS driver 'can do' 70% of the binary or something that indicates it does about 3/4 of the performance? I'm not sure what that means, though. It does it bug free? Which capabilities? Anyway, that is my argument, FWIW. Maybe more a concern but justified, imho.