As far as I can tell, the article is BS. It links to another article, which links... nowhere, really. I don't see anything about this on planet mozilla, nor on any of the Mozilla wiki planning pages.
I think the author of this article is misinterpreting a discussion I read a few days (a week?) back, where they discussed backporting some high value, relatively low-disruption features from trunk (3.7) to 3.6.x There was some back an forth on what was safe enough and valuable enough to merit backporting, but last I saw, they seemed to be leaning towards only doing "out of process plugins" (OOPP) aka "Flash crashes don't need to crash the browser". I certainly didn't see anything about dropping 3.7
I have been running Firefox and Mozilla/SeaMonkey nightlies as my primary browsers for many years. Back in Mozilla 0.9 - 1.5 days, early nightlies could be pretty rough, but now I rarely have any issues, even when big changes land on the trunk.
Sorry I offended. I was mostly surprised that the platinum definition didn't explicitly require playable speed, but I understand it is secondary to getting things working correctly first. And I admit I haven't tried it myself and just took the parent post's word on the speed issue.
The truth is, I am a big fan the ATI OSS driver dev team, and I thank you and your colleagues for all your hard work. I'll probably be back on ATI soon (from Intel) and I feel confident I'll have an overall good experience, thanks to you guys.
Oddly enough, I just saw that the RadeonProgram wiki page says TH08 is "platinum" with Mesa 7.5 on r500. Something doesn't seem right here...although I guess technically the definition of "platinum" they give doesn't say anything about speed, just correctness. Still, you might think that speed so bad that it is unplayable on low settings might be worth noting.
>[r500] radeon opensource drivers get an average of 10fps in older games such as UT2004 or less powerfull games like Touhou 8.
Huh. I admit I have no personal experience with 3D OSS on the r500, I just knew support existed. Obviously not that helpful if Imperishable Night only gets 10fps, though.
>Seems ATI dropped support for his GPU in their proprietary driver so now he has a choice. Option one, use the open source drivers which provide no 3d acceleration.
Bullpucky. Any/all cards that are not supported by the binary drivers do have 3D support from the OSS drivers.
>For Linux there is still only one 3D option - NVIDIA. Period.
Funny, my experience with 3D with both Intel and ATI has been great
Are you that guy from the Debian mailing list? You sound like him - unjustly bashing ATI/AMD, misrepresenting their statements, and exaggerating the problems ATI on Linux has.
They fact is that even the binary drivers (yuck) are much better than thy used to be, and the Free drivers are moving along by leaps and bounds. AMD has done very well with their promise to deliver documentation, and the Xorg guys are improving drivers as fast as they can, given limited manpower, and a rather large amount of (needed) churn in Xorg (DRI2, KMS, TTM/GEM, Gallium3D) that they need to keep up with.
I currently have Intel, but in 2007/2008 I had an r300, and it worked very well (free drivers). I have a lot of confidence in the Radeon driver, and sometime soonish I will probably get an r700 or r800.
There is a 64 bit Adobe Flash, and there have long been official 64 bit nightlies of FF and SeaMonkey - that's all I run. Of course, if you are on a lesser platform, like Windows or Mac, you are out of luck.
No, you couldn't. Just for starters, either the profile files will be locked and inaccessible to the second process, or they wouldn't be locked and the files (especially the sqlite files) would be completely trashed by the multiple processes writing to them at the same time.
Of course, with "-ProfileManager -no-remote" you can start a separate process and run it with a different profile but that isn't the same thing at all.
I prefer Intel for my light gaming, such as StarCraft, Civ3/4 and Quake3. Currently I have a X3500, which is less powerful than the X4500, which is less powerful than the GMA in Clarkdale. As the Anandtech review shows, Clarkdale holds up fairly well against the AMD 790GX (which in turn is comparable to a GeForce 9400M).
No, Intel is great. They have the best drivers right now (AMD OSS drivers are caching up, though), and as long as you don't play a lot of Wine Crysis they are plenty powerful.
Forgot to say that Intel doesn't really like GMA500 much, as they don't own it and didn't invent it, but rather licensed it from PowerVR, because they needed a very low power graphics chip in a hurry (I guess when they started Atom, they forgot to start a GFX chip at the same time). I expect Intel will kill off the GMA500 soon enough.
Intel chips only do XvMC (partial MPEG-2 acceleration).
ATI chips with UVD2 and running recent Catalyst drivers can make use of XVBA as a backend to VA-API. VA-API also has a VDPAU (Nvidia) backend, but VA-API is currently implemented in fewer projects than VDPAU. Only S3's Chrome 400/500 and Intel's (PowerVR's) GMA500 have native VA-API support, but their drivers are a cluster anyway.
Bottom line, unless you like binary Nvidia drivers, don't count on good video acceleration until after Gallium3D is in full effect.
but changing oil is more frequent, and also a giant pain in the ass, despite being technically simple. Painting a house is fairly simple and rare, but very time consuming, and again, a giant pain. Fixing a faucet is rather nice in comparison, and I think building a computer would be about the same, if you don't actively enjoy it.
Slashdot Mirror
VLC generally supports acceleration when os/driver/card support exists
As per update: http://beltzner.ca/mike/2010/01/15/of-rumours-and-broken-telephones/
As far as I can tell, the article is BS. It links to another article, which links... nowhere, really. I don't see anything about this on planet mozilla, nor on any of the Mozilla wiki planning pages.
I think the author of this article is misinterpreting a discussion I read a few days (a week?) back, where they discussed backporting some high value, relatively low-disruption features from trunk (3.7) to 3.6.x There was some back an forth on what was safe enough and valuable enough to merit backporting, but last I saw, they seemed to be leaning towards only doing "out of process plugins" (OOPP) aka "Flash crashes don't need to crash the browser". I certainly didn't see anything about dropping 3.7
Ah, finally found that discussion http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.planning/browse_thread/thread/f65f34aba408ca01/82b3086c93a18036
Note that there doesn't seem to be anything about dropping 3.7 anywhere on http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.planning/
I have been running Firefox and Mozilla/SeaMonkey nightlies as my primary browsers for many years. Back in Mozilla 0.9 - 1.5 days, early nightlies could be pretty rough, but now I rarely have any issues, even when big changes land on the trunk.
Ubuntu makes no sense for a company with Google's size, resources, and needs
Sorry I offended. I was mostly surprised that the platinum definition didn't explicitly require playable speed, but I understand it is secondary to getting things working correctly first. And I admit I haven't tried it myself and just took the parent post's word on the speed issue.
The truth is, I am a big fan the ATI OSS driver dev team, and I thank you and your colleagues for all your hard work. I'll probably be back on ATI soon (from Intel) and I feel confident I'll have an overall good experience, thanks to you guys.
Oddly enough, I just saw that the RadeonProgram wiki page says TH08 is "platinum" with Mesa 7.5 on r500. Something doesn't seem right here...although I guess technically the definition of "platinum" they give doesn't say anything about speed, just correctness. Still, you might think that speed so bad that it is unplayable on low settings might be worth noting.
>[r500] radeon opensource drivers get an average of 10fps in older games such as UT2004 or less powerfull games like Touhou 8.
Huh. I admit I have no personal experience with 3D OSS on the r500, I just knew support existed. Obviously not that helpful if Imperishable Night only gets 10fps, though.
I hope r300g and r600g get usable soonish.
>No, for a normal user they are unusable. Any less advanced person would not have spend those kind of hours on configuring a graphics card.
I don't remember doing much configuration for my r300
>Seems ATI dropped support for his GPU in their proprietary driver so now he has a choice. Option one, use the open source drivers which provide no 3d acceleration.
Bullpucky. Any/all cards that are not supported by the binary drivers do have 3D support from the OSS drivers.
>For Linux there is still only one 3D option - NVIDIA. Period.
Funny, my experience with 3D with both Intel and ATI has been great
Are you that guy from the Debian mailing list? You sound like him - unjustly bashing ATI/AMD, misrepresenting their statements, and exaggerating the problems ATI on Linux has.
They fact is that even the binary drivers (yuck) are much better than thy used to be, and the Free drivers are moving along by leaps and bounds. AMD has done very well with their promise to deliver documentation, and the Xorg guys are improving drivers as fast as they can, given limited manpower, and a rather large amount of (needed) churn in Xorg (DRI2, KMS, TTM/GEM, Gallium3D) that they need to keep up with.
I currently have Intel, but in 2007/2008 I had an r300, and it worked very well (free drivers). I have a lot of confidence in the Radeon driver, and sometime soonish I will probably get an r700 or r800.
>AGW. Which appears to be up for debate
LOL
There is a 64 bit Adobe Flash, and there have long been official 64 bit nightlies of FF and SeaMonkey - that's all I run. Of course, if you are on a lesser platform, like Windows or Mac, you are out of luck.
No, you couldn't. Just for starters, either the profile files will be locked and inaccessible to the second process, or they wouldn't be locked and the files (especially the sqlite files) would be completely trashed by the multiple processes writing to them at the same time.
Of course, with "-ProfileManager -no-remote" you can start a separate process and run it with a different profile but that isn't the same thing at all.
I prefer Intel for my light gaming, such as StarCraft, Civ3/4 and Quake3. Currently I have a X3500, which is less powerful than the X4500, which is less powerful than the GMA in Clarkdale. As the Anandtech review shows, Clarkdale holds up fairly well against the AMD 790GX (which in turn is comparable to a GeForce 9400M).
No, Intel is great. They have the best drivers right now (AMD OSS drivers are caching up, though), and as long as you don't play a lot of Wine Crysis they are plenty powerful.
Anyone that is not a gamer and some gamers, such as myself, that play only a few older, less intensive games
Forgot to say that Intel doesn't really like GMA500 much, as they don't own it and didn't invent it, but rather licensed it from PowerVR, because they needed a very low power graphics chip in a hurry (I guess when they started Atom, they forgot to start a GFX chip at the same time). I expect Intel will kill off the GMA500 soon enough.
It is evolved from the X4500HD (GMA9xx series)
Intel chips only do XvMC (partial MPEG-2 acceleration).
ATI chips with UVD2 and running recent Catalyst drivers can make use of XVBA as a backend to VA-API. VA-API also has a VDPAU (Nvidia) backend, but VA-API is currently implemented in fewer projects than VDPAU. Only S3's Chrome 400/500 and Intel's (PowerVR's) GMA500 have native VA-API support, but their drivers are a cluster anyway.
Bottom line, unless you like binary Nvidia drivers, don't count on good video acceleration until after Gallium3D is in full effect.
but changing oil is more frequent, and also a giant pain in the ass, despite being technically simple. Painting a house is fairly simple and rare, but very time consuming, and again, a giant pain. Fixing a faucet is rather nice in comparison, and I think building a computer would be about the same, if you don't actively enjoy it.
No, he is an agnostic golem, the guy he is talking to is an Omnian (i.e. hyperreligious whackjob)
Much as I love Pterry, it is still wrong. Some atheists may think of the gods constantly, but some (many?/most?) don't.
I certainly don't use Gnome or KDE (although both are fine DEs), but fd.o is very relevant to me.
fdo projects I find important/relevant (usage and maturity of specs vary):
cairo, dbus, xdg-utils, xdg-user-dirs, enchant, poppler, hal (and its replacements), shared-mime-info, harfbuzz, fontconfig, libxklavier, fribidi, liboil, DnD, ewmh, menu spec, icon theme spec, .desktop spec, icon naming spec, x direct save, xembed, the old systray spec, the new systray spec, recent file spec, thumbnail management spec, startup-notification-spec, cursor conventions spec, file URI spec, clipboard manager spec, trash specification, autostart spec, mpris, shared file metadata spec, sound theme spec
I am beginning to think emacs is, in fact, greater than vim (emacs is obviously > vi). But emacs key bindings are still far behind vim's