I have to disagree. If people are really concered about performance they should be using Linux anyway. What David said is also true. I'm not going to reccomend a company that doesn't support Linux. We also know that Online games require good bandwidth, and the Linux tcp/ip stack just tears up anything you can get from Microsoft. Linux could EASILY become the de facto gaming operating system.
Mike A. Harris wrote: >On Thu, 27 Sep 2001, Peter Surda wrote: > >>> Sure, that is a valid point but we need to remember that in the past >>> ATI has not been adverse to supporting open source drivers or to >>> releasing specs to qualified people. >>> >>They are very friendly actually. They provided me mach64 and r128 docs (under >>NDA) within 24 hours after I registered with them (last week). Although I must >>confess I've been recommended, it still shows that they are completely OK. I >>don't see any problems on the communication level, perhaps now that less >>people get paid for developing the drivers the pace will slow down, but not >>stop. >> >>What developers can do is to recommend ATI cards to end-users, so there is >>larger need for the drivers and larger chance someone would be willing to pay >>for them. >> > >I think your final comment here Peter really hits the nail on the >head. In all honesty, *any* level of support for Linux from any >hardware vendor - currently does not generate enough revenue to >barely cover costs involved in developing the drivers. That may >vary from vendor to vendor, but I'll bet it is more or less true. > >As such, if a vendor is going to support Linux at all - or more >generally open source, everyone needs to be greatful to the >companies that do provide the information needed to implement >drivers - be it under strict NDA, minor NDA, or completely gratis >no strings attached. And when I say NDA - I mean NDA that allows >the resulting code to be released into XFree86, etc.. > >In general - for any vendor to allow a small but organized group >of people access to information needed - who are well motivated, >and proven capable of implementing drivers is fantastic. > >In order for a vendor to write drivers themselves, or fund >development under contract - or even a 3rd party to fund such >development, there needs to be some benefit to that vendor for >supporting such an effort. If that happens, great! If a >particular driver development does not get funded, it is entirely >possible that whoever would be a potential funder of such - might >not see a return on their investment. > >In other words. If any large group of people want any vendor to >fund support for a given product, then support that company by >buying their existing supported products, and be sure to mention >that you are purchasing it for use in Linux. > > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Mike A. Harris Shipping/mailing address: >OS Systems Engineer 190 Pittsburgh Ave., Sault Ste. Marie, >XFree86 maintainer Ontario, Canada, P6C 5B3 >Red Hat Inc. Phone: (705)949-2136 >http://www.redhat.com ftp://people.redhat.com/mharris > >Red Hat XFree86 mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >General open IRC discussion: #xfree86 on irc.openprojects.org >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# rm -f /bin/laden > > >_______________________________________________ >Dri-devel mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel > _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
