Jens Mayer wrote: >* On Friday 01 July 2005 20:57, Justin Hart wrote: > > >>To counter this argument, I would point out that I don't normally >>purchase used 3D acceleration hardware, and that by the time these >>cards are "old" they will also be "obsolete," meaning that you will >>have sunk a good amount of money into hardware that didn't work >>properly for you until it was outdated. >> >> > >First of all, to avoid wrong assumptions: It's not the hardware that doesn't >work properly, it's the proprietary software driving them. My experiences and >my point of view is just the following: > >I don't care if my hardware is outdated or even "obsolete", as long as it >works. I'm not even interested in squeezing out the last frame per second >playing the most recent shooter of the year. Things I do care for example is >the ability to suspend my systems, and to gracefully resume afterwards. Both >cards have no problem in doing so, it's just the proprietary drivers that >suck, be it ATI or nVidia. > >As an addition, I like Xorg's eyecandy, and even the most "obsolete" card here >has enough power to support it, it's just the drivers that suck, be it ATI or >nVidia. I know that nVidia's drivers may work fine with brand new cards in >this context, but they won't ever support the things I'm after using my >Geforce2 GTS - it's "legacy". I'm pretty sure my ATI FireGL T2 will do so >sooner or later, just because there's much more information available to the >developers. They can work on it if ATI won't. With nVidia, you're doomed. At >this very moment, none of both manufacturers can give me the things which are >on top of my priorities, so I'm still going with unaccelerated open source >drivers in both cases. I just got used to wait... ;-) > >But while nVidia is forcing me to buy new hardware if I want to keep up with >features my card would still be able to support, ATI isn't. Free software is >about choice - so why would I want to have my freedom of choice denied by a >hardware manufacturer? It's nVidia who want me to spent money in my specific >case. > >As ATI is offering delayed informations about it's hardware, it's no big >surprise that Zack Rusin's first implementation of EXA[1], a new and resource >friendly acceleration architecture for Xorg, is done within the r200 open >source drivers for ATI cards. > >So is it good or bad thing buying ATI cards for Linux? What drives open source >development? I'm still pretty sure there's no clear "yes" or "no" suitable >for all situations and intentions. It's just the old "ATI sucks, nVidia >rocks" rant that gets on my nerves. Things ain't that simple, but I can see >and understand your point - it just differs from mine. ;-) > >Regards, >Jens > >Footnotes: >[1] http://dot.kde.org/1119948104/ > > > Hey all, I personally, am happy with my ATI stuff. I posted this question at the start of the thread, and I dont think it was answered. Using the Open Source Drivers, (which are in the kernel, right) will the Video Out port work on a Mobility Radeon 9000? Thanks!!! Ian
begin:vcard fn:Ian K n:K;Ian email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] note;quoted-printable:Pentium 3=0D=0A= 500mHz=0D=0A= 256MB RAM=0D=0A= 80.0GB HDD=0D=0A= ATI Radeon 7000 Evil Wizard 64MB=0D=0A= Computer name: "PentaQuad"=0D=0A= x-mozilla-html:TRUE version:2.1 end:vcard
