Re: VGA cards
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:50, Camaleón <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 10:20:29 -0800, Kelly Clowers wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 07:43, Camaleón wrote:
>>> Both, ATI and Nvidia are quite the same: they do not provide a complete
>>> access to their hardware specifications and just provide closed source
>> ATI provides complete access to the hardware specs, Nvidia provides no
>> access at all.
> Both, ATI and nvidia "closed drivers" are being rejected at the same
> level by kernel developers that think this is not the way to go.
Of course, the closed drivers are really pointless in the long run.
> Both, ATI and nvidia "free drivers" (nv/nouveau and radeon/radeonhd)
> still lack the same functionality level that the closed driver
Nouveau of course lags well behind, as they have to reverse
engineer everything. But the Radeon driver does rather well
against Catalyst/fglrx, mainly losing in perf and support for the
newest cards, while continuing to improve rapidly.
> ATI provides even a worst scenario to some people that cannot get their
> old cards working at all, neither with free drivers nor closed drivers
> which do not support "legacy models").
As for old ATI cards that don't work with the OSS driver, those
are simply bugs that need to be fixed, and there is no reason
they can't be fixed (since we have the docs), aside from man
power, maybe. (Unless we are talking pre-Radeon I guess,
but I can't bring myself to be very bothered about cards that
> So in fact, we get from ATI no much more than from nvidia :-/
On the contrary, ATI gives us all this: http://www.x.org/docs/AMD/
and Intel gives us at least this: http://www.x.org/docs/intel/
But Nvidia gives nothing at all.