Hey mods! Bite my shiny metal ass. Funny how my opinion is a troll, while the original posters is interesting... Think there might be some bias on the part of the fucktwit moderators?
Do you even know what "open source" means? It does not mean having a HUGE closed binary driver (larger than most people's linux kernel) that links to the kernel using a tiny wrapper whose source code is available. Nor does it mean having a OpenGL library and GLX extension whose source is completely unavailable.
Not to mention right now, the Nvidia cards win hands down on driver quality, which is a good advantage over ATI cards.
Hardly... Take my home computer, for example. A brand new i845 motherboard, with a single P4 processor. Using a GeForce3 and the drivers from nVidia, there is literally a two minute wait between the time I type 'startx' and the time X actually comes up. In the mean time, the screen flashes about three or four times, but the machine is completely unusable, even through ssh because the entire computer just stops functioning till X comes up.
Compare that to the FireGL drivers from ATI with a Radeon 8500 on the same machine. X starts up in less than 3 seconds.
Unfortunately, no one at nVidia can seem to tell me why this is happening. Until this is sorted out, and nVidia actually learns the meaning of "support", they've lost my business.
The Mobility Radeon 9000 should use the r200 core, iirc. I don't see why, with some modification perhaps, it wouldn't work with the r200 open source driver. The Radeon 9000 already does.
Perhaps you'd like to actually let us know what video adapter you're using. All anyone can glean is that you're using a laptop with an ATI chipset. Whoop-dee-doo...
And, if you'd like access to the specs for nearly all ATI hardware, you can become an XFree86 developer and sign the NDA that all XFree86 developers must sign. IIRC, all the necessary documentation (yes, excluding some of the fancy, glitzy features of the newest cards) is sitting on the XFree86 ftp server in an area restricted to their developers.
Feel free to use the open source DRI drivers which should work on PPC hardware.
With ATI you get the best of both worlds: feature complete binary drivers for those who have the necessary hardware and open specs allowing others to write open source drivers.
The drivers from ATI are not the drivers funded by the Weather Channel. There are open source drivers from the DRI project which were funded by the Weather Channel.
There are open source drivers for the 8*** series cards, and I do believe they work on PPC... Not quite as feature complete, but decent drivers nonetheless.
Dinivin
Re:How does it compare on windows?
on
Mesa 5.0 Released
·
· Score: 2
your definition of "vanilla" Mesa is kind of limited.
Uh, no it's not. The Mesa you download from the projects' website is "vanilla" Mesa. There's nothing limiting about that at all. I'm not saying anything bad about it (in fact, I use it every day), but Mesa and DRI are two separate projects, even if some of code (and some of the developers) overlaps.
Vanilla Mesa does not support hardware acceleration. It never has and it never will.
The Mesa that's included in the DRI does. That is not vanilla Mesa. If you were to go to the Mesa website, download the latest version, compile and install it, you wouldn't have hardware acceleration (unless you compiled the DRI or compiled Mesa against the Glide libraries, in which case it's no longer vanilla Mesa).
Dinivin
Re:How does it compare on windows?
on
Mesa 5.0 Released
·
· Score: 3, Informative
No, vanilla Mesa is not accelerated on any cards... When you see it accelerated with 3dfx cards, it's actually compiled against Glide.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey mods! Bite my shiny metal ass. Funny how my opinion is a troll, while the original posters is interesting... Think there might be some bias on the part of the fucktwit moderators?
Maybe because Family Guy was one of the most annoying pieces of trash on TV?
If it wasn't commonly known that Shelob's part had been moved to the beginning of ROTK, you might have a valid complaint
Dinivin
nVidia doesn't have a history of buggy drivers.
On my machine they certainly do.
Dinivin
They do have a responsibility to make their own code usable and consistant.
Funny... I haven't heard developers of any open source drivers complaining about the lack of consistency.
Dinivin
There has been exactly one public release of the FreeBSD drivers, fuckhead.
That is hardly "regular".
Dinivin
Do you even know what "open source" means? It does not mean having a HUGE closed binary driver (larger than most people's linux kernel) that links to the kernel using a tiny wrapper whose source code is available. Nor does it mean having a OpenGL library and GLX extension whose source is completely unavailable.
Dinivin
Not to mention right now, the Nvidia cards win hands down on driver quality, which is a good advantage over ATI cards.
Hardly... Take my home computer, for example. A brand new i845 motherboard, with a single P4 processor. Using a GeForce3 and the drivers from nVidia, there is literally a two minute wait between the time I type 'startx' and the time X actually comes up. In the mean time, the screen flashes about three or four times, but the machine is completely unusable, even through ssh because the entire computer just stops functioning till X comes up.
Compare that to the FireGL drivers from ATI with a Radeon 8500 on the same machine. X starts up in less than 3 seconds.
Unfortunately, no one at nVidia can seem to tell me why this is happening. Until this is sorted out, and nVidia actually learns the meaning of "support", they've lost my business.
Dinivin
They're regularly released for FreeBSD? How does one release become "regularly released"?
Dinivin
It would be fun if someone would have a look at the drivers and port them to BeOS.
It would be fun if nVidia open sourced the drivers so that you could look at them and port them to BeOS.
Dinivin
Except that ATI's linux drivers are a far cry from crap (and actually work for me, unlike nVidia's most recent drivers which just segfault).
In addition, ATI makes the specs available so that users who want to can develop their own drivers.
As a result, under Linux, Radeon 8500 (and newer) users have 3 drivers to choose from, depending on their needs, ethics, and desires.
Dinivin
There is IP involved they don't own, both from S3 and SGI.
And your proof to back up this statement would be what?
Dinivin
I sometimes think that this quote is more appropriate:
Linux is for people who love UNIX, BSD is for people who hate Linux.
Dinivin
Why do you ask? If you don't understand why China would want to filter those Taiwanese sites, I feel incredibly sorry for you.
Dinivin
The Mobility Radeon 9000 should use the r200 core, iirc. I don't see why, with some modification perhaps, it wouldn't work with the r200 open source driver. The Radeon 9000 already does.
Dinivin
Perhaps you'd like to actually let us know what video adapter you're using. All anyone can glean is that you're using a laptop with an ATI chipset. Whoop-dee-doo...
And, if you'd like access to the specs for nearly all ATI hardware, you can become an XFree86 developer and sign the NDA that all XFree86 developers must sign. IIRC, all the necessary documentation (yes, excluding some of the fancy, glitzy features of the newest cards) is sitting on the XFree86 ftp server in an area restricted to their developers.
Dinivin
Feel free to use the open source DRI drivers which should work on PPC hardware.
With ATI you get the best of both worlds: feature complete binary drivers for those who have the necessary hardware and open specs allowing others to write open source drivers.
Did you generate a new XF86Config file or did you just use one from the previous FireGL/8500 drivers?
I'm using the drivers here and XVideo works fine.
Dinivin
Uhhh... There are open source 8500 drivers, available from the DRI project. These are just a closed source alternative.
Next time, do some research before jumping to conclusions.
Dinivin
The drivers from ATI are not the drivers funded by the Weather Channel. There are open source drivers from the DRI project which were funded by the Weather Channel.
Dinivin
http://dri.sourceforge.net
There are open source drivers for the 8*** series cards, and I do believe they work on PPC... Not quite as feature complete, but decent drivers nonetheless.
Dinivin
your definition of "vanilla" Mesa is kind of limited.
Uh, no it's not. The Mesa you download from the projects' website is "vanilla" Mesa. There's nothing limiting about that at all. I'm not saying anything bad about it (in fact, I use it every day), but Mesa and DRI are two separate projects, even if some of code (and some of the developers) overlaps.
Dinivin
Let me amend this previous post. I can't say, with any knowledge, that vanilla Mesa will never support hardware accleration.
Dinivin
Let me say it again:
Vanilla Mesa does not support hardware acceleration. It never has and it never will.
The Mesa that's included in the DRI does. That is not vanilla Mesa. If you were to go to the Mesa website, download the latest version, compile and install it, you wouldn't have hardware acceleration (unless you compiled the DRI or compiled Mesa against the Glide libraries, in which case it's no longer vanilla Mesa).
Dinivin
No, vanilla Mesa is not accelerated on any cards... When you see it accelerated with 3dfx cards, it's actually compiled against Glide.
Dinivin