Getting fglrx to work on newer Radeon graphics cards (newer than the 9800 level) is increasing in the hassle factor. On the other hand, ATi makes it painfully clear that older cards aren't supported for fglrx at all in the newer distros (9.04+)--the convenient ol' "phase out of support." The 9.10 (Karmic), community-supported "valid" version only allows one resolution, 640X480, for my 4550....
I hate to say this: The traditional Linux techies really can't resort to dismissing such issues anymore. Their convenient "Pontius Pilate" response--washing their hands of proprietary driver issues--is annoying and insulting. The standard driver is so clumsy, stupid, and laughable that it's ignored by most of us who use Radeons--it's simply a flawed stepping stone to fglrx. Really, fglrx is essential for most "modern" Radeon cards. Dismissing it as inferior--and not deserving of any attention--insults our collective intelligence, right?!
I think developers should make certain that key issues in the usable video driver area are fixed and ready for the next version before releasing new distro versions--why so many new releases anyway (Yippee!)? What good are upgrades in other areas if we can't see them or even the screen? Maybe developers should "key" distro versions to Radeon, nVidia, and other (modern) video chipset cards: Developers act like video and graphics aren't very important. Unfortunately, they're key: Such issues generally are far more important than the other stuff they work on.
If Linus Torvalds on down hate proprietary software so much, why do they let Cyberlink sell software in order to get past codec and DRM issues? (At least that's true on Ubuntu.) We may end up paying for decent video drivers and support--maybe it's worth it. (I see a slippery slope.) It's clear that the Linux techies really can't deal with this effectively....
I hate to say this: The traditional Linux techies really can't resort to dismissing such issues anymore. Their convenient "Pontius Pilate" response--washing their hands of proprietary driver issues--is annoying and insulting. The standard driver is so clumsy, stupid, and laughable that it's ignored by most of us who use Radeons--it's simply a flawed stepping stone to fglrx. Really, fglrx is essential for most "modern" Radeon cards. Dismissing it as inferior--and not deserving of any attention--insults our collective intelligence, right?!
I think developers should make certain that key issues in the usable video driver area are fixed and ready for the next version before releasing new distro versions--why so many new releases anyway (Yippee!)? What good are upgrades in other areas if we can't see them or even the screen? Maybe developers should "key" distro versions to Radeon, nVidia, and other (modern) video chipset cards: Developers act like video and graphics aren't very important. Unfortunately, they're key: Such issues generally are far more important than the other stuff they work on.
If Linus Torvalds on down hate proprietary software so much, why do they let Cyberlink sell software in order to get past codec and DRM issues? (At least that's true on Ubuntu.) We may end up paying for decent video drivers and support--maybe it's worth it. (I see a slippery slope.) It's clear that the Linux techies really can't deal with this effectively....
Comment